Antitrust

Subscribe to Antitrust via RSS

Today, a notice and request was published in the Federal Register, inviting the public to comment on the FTC’s proposed consent agreement with Google and Motorola Mobility in FTC File No. 121-0120.  This proposed consent agreement would close the FTC’s investigation into certain Google/Motorola Mobility business practices concerning licensing and assertion of standard-essential patents that Motorola previously agreed to license on RAND terms (for more details, see our prior post on the consent agreement).
Continue Reading FTC invites public to comment on consent agreement with Google/Motorola Mobility

Late last week, Apple Inc. filed a notice of appeal with the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, announcing its intent to appeal to the Federal Circuit Judge Barbara B. Crabb’s dismissal of Apple’s SEP-related contract and antitrust claims against Motorola Mobility (case No. 3:11-cv-00178-bbc).  This presents us with an opportunity to do a brief “catching up on” post on this particular portion of the larger Apple-Motorola dispute.
Continue Reading Catching up on … Apple v. Motorola Mobility (W.D. Wis.)

On Tues., Nov. 20, 2012, in Ritz Camera & Image, LLC v. SanDisk Corp., No. 2012-1183, the Federal Circuit (Bryson, Dyk, and Moore) broadened the ability of direct purchasers of patented products to bring claims of antitrust violations under the Walker Process theory of liability (as set forth in the Supreme Court’s opinion inWalker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chem. Corp., 382 U.S. 172 (1965)).  The Court found that a direct purchaser of patented goods has antitrust standing and is therefore not categorically precluded from bringing aWalker Process antitrust claim against the patent owner, even when the direct purchaser would not have standing to bring a declaratory judgment claim against the patent owner under the patent laws.
Continue Reading Patent Alert: Federal Circuit Rules that Antitrust Standing Applies to Walker Process Claims (Ritz Camera v. SanDisk)