Winter 2008, Volume 1, Number 1

In this issue: linkLine Commc’ns v. SBC California, 503 F.3d 876 (9th Cir. 2007) Jonathan Jacobson, Valentina Rucker, Jan 07, 2008 Whither Price Squeeze Antitrust? The Ninth Circuit’s decision in LinkLine Communications, Inc. v. SBC California creates a split in circuit court decisions on price squeeze claims post-Trinko. Jonathan Rubin, Jan 10, 2008 Comment on […]

This article is part of a Chronicle. See more from this Chronicle David Olsky, Jan 14, 2008 In linkLine Communications, Inc. v. SBC California, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that an antitrust plaintiff may bring a “price squeeze” claim even when the alleged monopolist had no legal duty to […]

This article is part of a Chronicle. See more from this Chronicle Thomas Brown, Jan 09, 2008 A group of academics filed a brief in October urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant the petition for certiorari in Pacific Bell Telephone Company v. linkLine Communications, No. 07-512. In and of itself, this is not surprising. […]

This article is part of a Chronicle. See more from this Chronicle Jonathan Rubin, Jan 10, 2008 The Ninth Circuit’s majority opinion in Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. linkLine Communications, Inc. is a thoughtful and not at all unreasonable approach to the application of the antitrust laws to telecommunications. Should the U.S. Supreme Court grant […]

This article is part of a Chronicle. See more from this Chronicle Jonathan Jacobson, Valentina Rucker, Jan 07, 2008 Although the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Verizon Communications, Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko circumscribed a plaintiff’s ability to set forth a claim against a monopolist for a refusal to deal, the case […]