3M Co. v. LePage's Inc.
| Decision Date | 30 June 2004 |
| Docket Number | No. 02-1865.,02-1865. |
| Citation | 542 U.S. 953 |
| Parties | 3M CO., FKA MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING CO. v. LePAGE'S INC. ET AL. |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 324 F. 3d 141.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
-
Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth
... ... Rill, Scott E. Flick, and Thomas J. Dillickrath, Howrey LLP, Washington, D.C., John Thorne and Paul J. Larkin, Jr., Verizon Communications, Inc"., Arlington, VA, Douglas S. Grandstaff, Caterpillar, Inc., Peoria, IL, for amici curiae Verizon Communications Inc. and Caterpillar Inc ... \xC2" ... ...
-
Cascade Health Solutions v. Peacehealth
... ... Rill, Scott E. Flick, and Thomas J. Dillickrath, Howrey LLP, Washington, DC, John Thorne and Paul J. Larkin, Jr., Verizon Communications, Inc., Arlington, Virginia, Douglas S. Grandstaff, Caterpillar, Inc., Peoria, Illinois, for amid curiae Verizon Communications Inc. and Caterpillar Inc ... ...
- Bradburn Parent Teacher Store, Inc. v. 3M
1 firm's commentaries
-
Third Circuit Upholds Finding Of Antitrust Liability For Above-Cost Pricing Arrangement
...antitrust liability for single-firm conduct. For example, in LePage's Inc. v. 3M, 324 F.3d 141 (3d Cir. 2003) (en banc), cert. denied, 542 U.S. 953 (2004), the court found that bundled discounts that had exclusionary effects violated the antitrust laws despite no showing of below-cost prici......
2 books & journal articles
-
Daniel A. Crane, Mixed Bundling, Profit Sacrifice, and Consumer Welfare
...the alleged victim of the bundling scheme-LePage's-did not compete. Petition for a Writ of Certiorari at 19, 3M Co. v. LePage's Inc., 542 U.S. 953 (2004); see also Rubinfeld, supra note 3, at 249 (noting that "LePage's made no showing that 3M had market power with respect to any product exc......
-
A bundle of trouble: an analysis of how the lower courts have handled bundled discounts since LePage's Inc. v. 3M.
...Restraints Law: Will the New Learning Take Hold?, 2006 UTAH L. REV. 829, 841 (2006). (2.) 324 F.3d 141 (2003) (en banc), cert. denied, 542 U.S. 953 (3.) See, e.g., J.B.D.L. Corp. v. Wyeth-Ayerst Labs., Inc., No. 1:01-CV-704, No. 1:03-CV-781, 2005 WL 1396940, at *13-*14 (S.D. Ohio June 13, 2......