An appeals court in Chicago announced Tuesday that it has decided to vacate its earlier decision to uphold the dismissal of Motorola Mobility’s lawsuit claiming it was a victim of the LCD panel price-fixing collusion, according to reports.
The court’s decision revives Motorola’s case against various LCD makers including Samsung Electrics and Sharp. The case will now be heard again.
The court did not offer a reason for its change of heart.
Mobile phone manufacturer Motorola, owned by Google, is suing companies that were found to have manipulated LCD screen prices. The case has earned significant attention by antitrust experts because Motorola is fighting the actions of LCD makers’ overseas affiliates.
The appeals court found last March that those overseas companies were beyond the reach of US antitrust law, and therefore dismissed the case.
The court is headed by US Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner.
”If the remedies are inadequate, or if the countries don’t have or don’t enforce antitrust laws, these were the risks that the subsidiaries (and hence Motorola) assumed by deciding to do business in those countries,” Posner wrote in the March decision.
That ruling aligned with last January’s ruling by US District Judge Joan B. Gottschall, who found similar reasoning for dismissing the case.
But Motorola was backed by the American Antitrust Institute and the Federal Trade Commission in its pursuit to have its case heard. Experts warned that dismissing the case on these grounds has wide, negative implications for the effectiveness and strength of federal antitrust law.
Full content: Bloomberg
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand