Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Competition (2)
- Circuit split (1)
- Damages (1)
- District courts (1)
- EBay v. MercExchange (1)
-
- Extraterritoriality (1)
- F. Hoffmann-LaRoche Ltd. v. Empagran S.A. (1)
- Federal Trade Commission v. Morton Salt Co. (1)
- Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act (1)
- Foreign plaintiffs (1)
- Holdups (1)
- Incentives (1)
- Injunctions (1)
- Injury (1)
- Markets (1)
- Nonpracticing entities (1)
- Patent trolls (1)
- Patents (1)
- Price discrimination (1)
- Pricing (1)
- Robinson-Patman Price Discrimination Act (1)
- Sherman Act (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- Volvo Trucks North America Inc. v. Reeder-Simco GMC Inc. (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Courts
Trolling For Trolls: The Pitfalls Of The Emerging Market Competition Requirement For Permanent Injunctions In Patent Cases Post-Ebay, Benjamin H. Diessel
Trolling For Trolls: The Pitfalls Of The Emerging Market Competition Requirement For Permanent Injunctions In Patent Cases Post-Ebay, Benjamin H. Diessel
Michigan Law Review
In eBay v. MercExchange, a unanimous Supreme Court announced that a new four-factor test should be employed by district courts in determining whether to award an injunction or damages to an aggrieved party whose intellectual property has been infringed. In the context of permanent injunctions in patent cases, district courts have distorted the four-factor test resulting in a "market competition requirement." Under the new market competition requirement, success at obtaining an injunction is contingent upon a party demonstrating that it is a market competitor After consistent application in the first twenty-five district court cases post-eBay, the market competition requirement …
Reading Too Much Into Reeder-Simco?, Jeremy M. Suhr
Reading Too Much Into Reeder-Simco?, Jeremy M. Suhr
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that a careful analysis of the Supreme Court's opinion in Volvo Trucks North America, Inc. v. Reeder-Simco GMC, Inc. demonstrates that, despite the expansive dicta appearing in part IV of that opinion, the Court did not intend to reshape the course of its Robinson-Patman Act jurisprudence in any significant way. The Court's opinion operated well within the confines of established Robinson-Patman Act doctrine, even if its searching review of the evidence presented at trial represented a rare foray into the arena of factual error correction. After Reeder-Simco, however, many commentators emphasized the dicta in part IV …
Keeping The Door Ajar For Foreign Plaintiffs In Global Cartel Cases After Empagran, Jeremy M. Suhr
Keeping The Door Ajar For Foreign Plaintiffs In Global Cartel Cases After Empagran, Jeremy M. Suhr
Michigan Law Review
In many ways, the Supreme Court's opinion of F. Hoffmann-LaRoche Ltd. V. Empagran S.A. raised more questions than it answered. Growing out of the massive international vitamins cartel uncovered in the 1990s, Empagran presented a scenario in which all parties were foreign and all conduct occurred abroad. Although it is "well established by now that the Sherman Act applies to foreign conduct that was meant to produce and did in fact produce some substantial effect in the United States," Empagran presented the Court with the first truly foreign antitrust case. It involved not only foreign conduct, but also foreign plaintiffs …