Three companies are again facing a lawsuit accusing them of fixing memory card prices after a federal appeals court overturned an earlier ruling that dismissed the case, according to reports.
Panasonic, SanDisk and Toshiba were dealt a setback after the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals said an earlier judge was wrong in deciding that the plaintiffs had waited too long to file their lawsuit against the defendants. Reports say the companies control 70 percent of the market for SD cards.
Licensing group SD-3C LLC was also named as a defendant.
An earlier judge had ruled the statute of limitations had expired for SD buyers to sue the companies, but this week Circuit Judge Richard Paez said that the four-year limit did not apply in this case because the alleged anticompetitive acts were “continuing” each time a new SD card was sold, reports say.
”Plaintiffs should not be penalized for failing to foresee earlier that they would enter the market for SD cards and would therefore be harmed by defendants’ conduct,” the judge wrote Wednesday.
The plaintiffs claim the companies set a “fair market price” for SD cards originating in a licensing agreement made between the companies in 2006. The suit was filed in 2011.
A May 2012 ruling by US District Judge Jeffrey White first dismissed the case.
The appellate court’s decision follows an earlier ruling by the 9th Circuit last month that similarly revived another lawsuit initiated by Samsung that accused Panasonic and the licensing group of harming competition. Samsung received royalties from licensing the SD card technology to Panasonic.
Full content: Yahoo News
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Covington & Burling Expands UK Antitrust Team with Senior ICO Counsel
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Aldi Eyed Kroger-Albertsons Stores Before C&S Deal
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Blue Cross Blue Shield Agrees to Pay $2.8 Billion to Settle Antitrust Claims
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Spain’s BBVA Faces Lengthy Antitrust Review in Hostile Sabadell Takeover Bid
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Hermes Faces Renewed Antitrust Claims Over Birkin Bag Sales Practices
Oct 14, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh