Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
    • Articles
  • Law Firms
    • Law Firms
  • Organizations
    • Organizations
    • ANTITRUST—9th Cir.: Invisalign® manufacturer must face refusal to deal allegations
    • ACQUISITIONS & MERGERS NEWS: Law firm files antitrust suit over ‘killer acquisition’ in legal research database market
      • You have 1 more complimentary views available this month. Log in if you are already a customer
    • ADVERTISING—D. Ariz.: ‘Low acid’ coffee dispute creates aroma of multiple factual uncertainties best suited for trial
      • You have 1 more complimentary views available this month. Log in if you are already a customer
    • ANTITRUST—N.D. Ohio: Locksmith fails to support key allegations that an industry certification was anticompetitive
      • You have 1 more complimentary views available this month. Log in if you are already a customer
    • FRANCHISING & DISTRIBUTION NEWS: FTC settles Franchise Rule violations suit against martial arts franchisor
      • You have 1 more complimentary views available this month. Log in if you are already a customer
    • FRANCHISING & DISTRIBUTION—W.D. La.: Choice Hotels sends franchisee fraud and disclosure claims to arbitration
      • You have 1 more complimentary views available this month. Log in if you are already a customer
  • Articles
    • Articles
  • Law Firms
    • Law Firms
  • Organizations
    • Organizations

    Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—N.D. Ohio: Locksmith fails to support key allegations that an industry certification was anticompetitive, (Oct 6, 2026)

    Law Firms Mentioned:Pierson Ferdinand LLP
    Organizations Mentioned:American Association of Automatic Door Manufacturers

    By Justin Marcus Smith, J.D.

    The facial appropriateness of per se treatment was a question of law to be decided at the dismissal stage, it did not apply in the context, and the locksmith did not make a facial showing of a Sherman Act violation under a rule of reason analysis.

    A l ...

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use