Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—W.D. Wash.: Claim that NFL playoff ticketing policy was anticompetitive tossed, (Nov 3, 2014)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

The National Football League successfully defended against a consumer’s antitrust and consumer protection claims regarding an alleged geographic restriction on primary-market NFC Championship game tickets between the Seahawks and the 49ers. In dismissing the claims with prejudice, the federal district court in Seattle determined that the consumer failed to state a claim under the Sherman, Clayton, and Washington Consumer Protection Acts (Williams v. National Football League, October 31, 2014, Pechman, M.).

Background. John E. Williams filed suit against the NFL and others, alleging he was denied the opportunity to purchase tickets to the January 16, 2014 game between the Seattle Seahawks and the San Francisco 49ers at Seattle’s CenturyLink Field. Specifically, Williams alleged that the defendants placed a geographic restriction on the ticket sales to buyers with billing addresses in Washington and other nearby states and provinces. He further argued that he was injured by the geographic restriction because he was excluded from the purchase of tickets in the primary market. The defendants moved to dismiss Williams’ complaint.

Antitrust claims. Williams brought antitrust claims under both the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. However, the court determined that he failed to state a valid claim under either act. Specifically, it found that there was no showing of market power in a “relevant market,” pursuant to the Sherman Act, because Williams’ threadbare allegations did not relate to competition between firms in a market, but to the exercise of a natural monopoly on sales of tickets to a single stadium. In addition, the court found that tickets to a Seahawks game are not tangible goods, but revocable licenses, rendering the Clayton Act inapplicable.

Consumer protection. The court also found that Williams’ consumer protection claims were insufficient, because it could not discern any allegations about an unfair or deceptive act or practice, as defined under the Washington Consumer Protection Act. To the extent Williams attempted to state a claim under the Federal Trade Commission Act, that claim failed, as there is no private right of action under the “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” section of that Act, according to the court.

The court dismissed Williams’ complaint with prejudice, noting that the proposed second amended complaint failed to address the court’s identified deficiencies and Williams further attempted to recycle the same causes of action under new labels.

The case number is C14-1089 MJP.

Attorneys: John E. Williams III, pro se. Jonathan David Pressment (Haynes and Boone, LLP) and Molly A. Terwilliger (Summit Law Group) for National Football League. John Goldmark (Davis Wright Tremaine) for Seattle Seahawks.

Companies: National Football League

Cases: Antitrust ConsumerProtection WashingtonNews