Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, SUPREME COURT DOCKET: Recent decisions, cases, and petitions pending High Court review, (Apr 14, 2015)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

This Antitrust Law Daily feature presents a chart highlighting the decisions, arguments, briefs, and petitions on antitrust and trade regulation issues before the 2014 Term of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Currently, there are 13 antitrust and trade regulation cases that are awaiting Supreme Court Review. Since the opening of the 2014 term, the Court has issued an opinion in two antitrust cases; granted review in two additional antitrust cases; and denied review in 16 other cases involving acquisitions and mergers, advertising, antitrust, consumer protection, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

In The Harvard Drug Group, LLC v. Barr, The Harvard Drug Group, LLC—a wholesale distributor of prescription and over-the-counter drugs—has petitioned the Supreme Court to review a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta, finding that the effect of an unaccepted offer of complete relief was not a judgment, nor an injunction or change in the legal relationship between the parties. Scott Barr, a dentist, filed the initial suit against Harvard Drug, alleging that the company violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act when sending Barr an unsolicited fax, containing what Barr argued was an insufficient opt-out notice.

Harvard Drug presented the same questions to the Court that are the subject of the Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez petition (Dkt. 14-857), including: (1) Whether a case becomes moot, and thus beyond the judicial power of Article III, when the plaintiff receives an offer of complete relief on his claim; and (2) Whether the answer to the first question is any different when the plaintiff has asserted a class claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and receives an offer of complete relief before any class is certified.

The Supreme Court has also declined to disturb a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco, reviving antitrust claims against developers of SD digital memory card technology on statute of limitations and laches grounds. The developers asked the Court whether they should be subject to antitrust suits seeking injunctive relief against the foundational terms of a decade-old standard setting and technology licensing arrangement for as long as third parties continue to make sales of goods embodying the technology. They additionally question the Ninth Circuit’s decision to treat statute of limitations analysis as dispositive on the issue of laches, without considering the broader equitable issues associated with permitting challenges to long-settled business arrangements.

For details about these and other petitions and cases pending before the Supreme Court, please consult the chart of antitrust and trade regulation cases awaiting decision in the 2014 term. Issued opinions, granted petitions, pending petitions, and denied petitions are listed separately, along with a summary of the questions presented and the current status of each case.

News: Antitrust AcquisitionsMergers Advertising ConsumerProtection RICO StateUnfairTradePractices