From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Payment Card Interchange Fee

United States District Court, E.D. New York
May 14, 2008
562 F. Supp. 2d 392 (E.D.N.Y. 2008)

Summary

noting that “whereas a seller in a market with low entry barriers could not raise its prices without the risk that a new seller would enter the market and offer the same product for a lower price, a competitor in a market with high entry barriers could raise its prices unfettered by the prospect of a new entrant into the market who would undercut prices”

Summary of this case from United States v. Am. Express Co.

Opinion

No. 05-MD-1720 (JG) (JO).

May 14, 2008


ORDER


Having reviewed the objections to Magistrate Judge Orenstein's January 11, 2008 Report and Recommendation denying the defendants' motion to dismiss the individual merchant plaintiffs' claims under Section 2 of the Sherman Act and having found them to be without merit, I hereby adopt Magistrate Judge Orenstein's Report and Recommendation.

So ordered.


Summaries of

In re Payment Card Interchange Fee

United States District Court, E.D. New York
May 14, 2008
562 F. Supp. 2d 392 (E.D.N.Y. 2008)

noting that “whereas a seller in a market with low entry barriers could not raise its prices without the risk that a new seller would enter the market and offer the same product for a lower price, a competitor in a market with high entry barriers could raise its prices unfettered by the prospect of a new entrant into the market who would undercut prices”

Summary of this case from United States v. Am. Express Co.
Case details for

In re Payment Card Interchange Fee

Case Details

Full title:In re PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. New York

Date published: May 14, 2008

Citations

562 F. Supp. 2d 392 (E.D.N.Y. 2008)

Citing Cases

All Star Carts & Vehicles, Inc. v. BFI Canada Income Fund

A claim of attempted monopolization requires the pleading of facts showing that the defendant: (1) "engaged…

All Star Carts and Vehicles, Inc. v. BFI Canada Income Fund

Where, as here, the claim is for attempted monopolization, plaintiff must prove that defendants: (1) "…