U.S.A. v. Footracer

Decision Date06 June 2001
CitationU.S.A. v. Footracer, 252 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2001)
Parties(9th Cir. 2001) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOHNNY ROY FOOT RACER, Defendant-Appellant. No: 97-10528 Filed
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Before: Harry Pregerson, Charles Wiggins, Melvin Brunetti, and Michael Daly Hawkins, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

The opinion filed August 31, 1999, published at 189 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 1999), is withdrawn. An unpublished memorandum is simultaneously filed.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
33 cases
  • Toranto v. Jaffurs, Case No.: 16cv1709–JAH (NLS)
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • March 20, 2018
    ... ... NBC Universal, Inc. , 675 F.3d 1192, 1197 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting Atlantic Richfield Company v. USA Petroleum Co. , 495 U.S. 328, 334, 110 S.Ct. 1884, 109 L.Ed.2d 333 (1990). Defendants contend because Plaintiff fails to plead sufficient facts to ... ...
  • Reapers Hockey Ass'n, Inc. v. Amateur Hockey Ass'n Ill., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • September 26, 2019
    ... ... at 562, 127 S.Ct. 1955. II. Facts AHAI is USA Hockey, Inc.'s regional affiliate for the State of Illinois, [6] ¶ 25; [35-1] ¶¶ 4, 5, and USA Hockey is the United States Olympic Committee's ... ...
  • Maui Jim, Inc. v. Smartbuy Guru Enters.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • May 10, 2019
    ... ... Chase Bank USA, N.A. , 274 F.R.D. 637, 639–40 (N.D. Ill. 2011) (collecting cases). ANALYSIS Maui Jim moves to dismiss with prejudice four counts in SBG's amended ... ...
  • Delano Farms Co. v. California Table Grape Com'n
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • February 20, 2009
  • Get Started for Free
9 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Antitrust Health Care Handbook, Fourth Edition
    • February 1, 2010
    ...466 F.3d 187 (2d Cir. 2006), 104, 268 Tampa Elec. Co. v, Nashville Coal Co., 365 U.S. 320 (1961), 31, 74, 75 Tanaka v. Univ. of S. Cal., 252 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2001), 52 Tarabishi v. McAlester Reg’! Hosp., 951 F.2d 1558 (10th Cir. 112, 205 Taylor v. Christus St. Joseph Health Sys., 216 Fed......
  • Assessing Market Power
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Pharmaceutical Industry Antitrust Handbook. Second Edition
    • December 8, 2018
    ...into market power and market structure designed to assess the combination’s actual effect.”)); see also Tanaka v. Univ. of S. Cal., 252 F.3d 1059, 1063 (9th Cir. 2001) (“A restraint violates the rule of reason if the restraint’s harm to competition outweighs its procompetitive effects. The ......
  • Sherman Act: Common Issues and Recurring Subject Areas
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Sports and Antitrust Law
    • December 9, 2014
    ...sports leagues and other entertainment 10. United States v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563, 570-71 (1966). 11. Tanaka v. Univ. of S. Cal., 252 F.3d 1059, 1063 (9th Cir. 2001); see also United States v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 351 U.S. 377, 380 (1956) (discussing standards for product a......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Pharmaceutical Industry Antitrust Handbook. Second Edition
    • December 8, 2018
    ...F.3d 370 (2d Cir. 2005), 111 Tampa Elec. Co. v. Nashville Coal Co., 365 U.S. 320 (1961), 302, 363, 364, 371 Tanaka v. Univ. of S. Cal., 252 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2001), 168 TCH Corp., 118 F.T.C. 368 (1994), 355 Telecor Commc’ns v. S.W. Bell Tel., 305 F.3d 1124 (10th Cir. 2002), 161 Terazosin ......
  • Get Started for Free