49 Cited authorities

Wyeth v. Levine
555 U.S. 555 (2009) Cited 1,429 times 101 Legal Analyses
Holding that the FDA's drug labeling judgments pursuant to the FDCA did not obstacle preempt state law products liability claims
Crosby v. Nat'l Foreign Trade Council
530 U.S. 363 (2000) Cited 982 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that a state Burma sanctions bill conflicted with a federal Burma sanctions bill because it undermined Congress's delegation to the President of "flexible and effective authority" to adjust all sanctions in response to changing conditions
Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois
431 U.S. 720 (1977) Cited 1,286 times 61 Legal Analyses
Holding that indirect purchasers cannot recover damages under federal antitrust law
California v. Arc America Corp.
490 U.S. 93 (1989) Cited 498 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Sherman Act, which does not allow indirect purchaser actions, does not preempt state laws that allow indirect purchasers to obtain relief
Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc.
55 Cal.4th 1185 (Cal. 2013) Cited 667 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[i]nterpretations of federal antitrust law are at most instructive, not conclusive, when construing the Cartwright Act, given that the Cartwright Act was modeled not on federal antitrust statutes but instead on statutes enacted by California's sister states around the turn of the 20th century."
F. Hofpmann-La Roche Ltd. v. Empagran S. A.
542 U.S. 155 (2004) Cited 210 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding domestic effects exception does not apply where "price-fixing conduct significantly and adversely affects both customers outside the United States and customers within the United States, but the adverse foreign effect is independent of any adverse domestic effect"
Obb Personenverkehr AG v. Sachs
577 U.S. 27 (2015) Cited 127 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a one-element approach" is "flatly incompatible" with the Court's precedent
Japan Line, Ltd. v. County of Los Angeles
441 U.S. 434 (1979) Cited 271 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding unconstitutional application of California's ad valorem property tax to cargo containers based in Japan and used exclusively in foreign commerce
Lotes Co. v. Hon Hai Precision Indus. Co.
753 F.3d 395 (2d Cir. 2014) Cited 248 times 5 Legal Analyses
Rejecting the Ninth Circuit's conflation of the two definitions
Minn–Chem, Inc. v. Agrium Inc.
683 F.3d 845 (7th Cir. 2012) Cited 241 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that import exclusion applied because transactions in which plaintiffs purchased potash directly from foreign cartel members constitute import commerce
Rule 16 - Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 Cited 33,578 times 51 Legal Analyses
Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)
Section 93A:2 - Unfair practices; legislative intent; rules and regulations
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A § 2 Cited 1,304 times 18 Legal Analyses
Granting Massachusetts attorney general the authority to make rules and regulations interpreting section 2
Section 6a - Conduct involving trade or commerce with foreign nations
15 U.S.C. § 6a Cited 225 times 30 Legal Analyses
Stating that Sherman Act "shall not apply to conduct involving trade or commerce (other than import trade or import commerce) with foreign nations"
Section 2453 - Practices prohibited; antitrust and consumer protection
Vt. Stat. tit. 9 § 2453 Cited 132 times
Affirming that consumer protection requirements apply in real estate transactions
Section 480-3 - Interpretation
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 480-3 Cited 40 times
Providing that HRS ch. 480 shall be construed in accordance with judicial interpretations of similar federal antitrust statutes.
Section 740 ILCS 10/11
740 ILCS 10/11 Cited 35 times 1 Legal Analyses
Indicating that Illinois state courts should be guided by the federal antitrust law where the wording of the state act is identical to a federal provision
Section 44-1412 - Uniformity
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1412 Cited 24 times
This article shall be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this article among those states that enact it. It is the intent of the legislature that in construing this article, the courts may use as a guide interpretations given by the federal courts to comparable federal antitrust statutes. A.R.S. § 44-1412
Section 445.784 - Incorporation of provisions similar to uniform state antitrust act; application and construction; interpretations by federal court
Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.784 Cited 24 times
(1) To the extent that this act incorporates provisions of or provisions similar to the uniform state antitrust act, this act shall be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this act among those states that enact similar provisions. (2) It is the intent of the legislature that in construing all sections of this act, the courts shall give due deference to interpretations given by the federal courts to comparable antitrust statutes
Section 47-18-16 - Judicial construction
W. Va. Code § 47-18-16 Cited 23 times
Providing that the state antitrust act shall "be construed liberally and in harmony with ruling judicial interpretations of comparable federal antitrust statutes."
Section 57-1-15 - Construction
N.M. Stat. § 57-1-15 Cited 19 times
Providing the state statute "shall be construed in harmony with judicial interpretations of the federal antitrust laws. This construction shall be made to achieve uniform application of the state and federal laws prohibiting restraints of trade and monopolistic practices."

Chip-Tech, Ltd. v. Panasonic Corporation et al

49 Cited authorities

Holding that the FDA's drug labeling judgments pursuant to the FDCA did not obstacle preempt state law products liability claims

Holding that a state Burma sanctions bill conflicted with a federal Burma sanctions bill because it undermined Congress's delegation to the President of "flexible and effective authority" to adjust all sanctions in response to changing conditions

Holding that indirect purchasers cannot recover damages under federal antitrust law

Holding that the Sherman Act, which does not allow indirect purchaser actions, does not preempt state laws that allow indirect purchasers to obtain relief

Holding domestic effects exception does not apply where "price-fixing conduct significantly and adversely affects both customers outside the United States and customers within the United States, but the adverse foreign effect is independent of any adverse domestic effect"

Holding that "a one-element approach" is "flatly incompatible" with the Court's precedent

Holding unconstitutional application of California's ad valorem property tax to cargo containers based in Japan and used exclusively in foreign commerce

Rejecting the Ninth Circuit's conflation of the two definitions

Holding that import exclusion applied because transactions in which plaintiffs purchased potash directly from foreign cartel members constitute import commerce

Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)

Granting Massachusetts attorney general the authority to make rules and regulations interpreting section 2

Stating that Sherman Act "shall not apply to conduct involving trade or commerce (other than import trade or import commerce) with foreign nations"

Affirming that consumer protection requirements apply in real estate transactions

Providing that HRS ch. 480 shall be construed in accordance with judicial interpretations of similar federal antitrust statutes.

Indicating that Illinois state courts should be guided by the federal antitrust law where the wording of the state act is identical to a federal provision

Providing that the state antitrust act shall "be construed liberally and in harmony with ruling judicial interpretations of comparable federal antitrust statutes."

Providing the state statute "shall be construed in harmony with judicial interpretations of the federal antitrust laws. This construction shall be made to achieve uniform application of the state and federal laws prohibiting restraints of trade and monopolistic practices."