Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Phoebe Putney Health Sys., Inc.

23 Citing briefs

  1. Americare Medservices Inc v. City of Buena Park et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed December 30, 2016

    8 Second, this Court should deny AmeriCare's request fora "market participant" 9 exception to state-action immunity for one simple reason: the Supreme Court does 10 not recognize it. Phoebe Putney, 133 S. Ct. at 1010, n.4. Likewise, no Ninth Circuit z o 11 authority acknowledges that such an exception exists.

  2. SolarCity Corporation v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District

    RESPONSE in Opposition re: 53 First MOTION to Dismiss Case

    Filed July 24, 2015

    Nor is the anticompetitive conduct challenged by SolarCity in this case “the inherent, logical or ordinary result” of anything the State has authorized. Phoebe, 133 S. Ct. at 1012. The District has not met the authorization requirement.7 2.

  3. Diverse Power Inc. v. City of Lagrange, Georgia

    MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM with Brief In Support

    Filed April 3, 2017

    The fact that LaGrange has elected to impose a condition on its agreement to provide 2 Notably, the language of O.C.G.A. § 36-65-2 exactly tracks (and meets) the Supreme Court’s standard articulated in Phoebe Putney—that is, “‘the challenged restraint … be one clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed as state policy.’” 133 S. Ct. at 1010 (internal citation omitted). Case 3:17-cv-00003-TCB Document 17-1 Filed 04/03/17 Page 15 of 31 10 water utility services to new construction customers located outside city limits was a foreseeable and logical result of Georgia’s statutory framework.

  4. Diverse Power Inc. v. City of Lagrange, Georgia

    MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM with Brief In Support

    Filed February 10, 2017

    The fact that LaGrange has elected to impose a condition on its agreement to provide water utility services to new construction customers outside LaGrange city limits was a foreseeable and logical result of Georgia’s statutory framework. Because “we 2 Notably, the language of O.C.G.A. § 36-65-2 exactly tracks (and meets) the Supreme Court’s standard articulated in Phoebe Putney—that is, “‘the challenged restraint … be one clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed as state policy.’” 133 S. Ct. at 1010 (internal citation omitted). Case 3:17-cv-00003-TCB Document 8-1 Filed 02/10/17

  5. Americare Medservices Inc v. City of Costa Mesa et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint

    Filed January 6, 2017

    As it would be "unrealistic" for the legislature to set forth every anticompetitive effect, "a state policy to displace federal antitrust law [is] sufficiently expressed where the displacement of competition [is] the inherent, logical, or ordinary result of the exercise of authority delegated by the state legislature." Phoebe, 133 S. Ct. at 1012-13. Here, the EMS Act explicitly sets forth California's policy to displace competition in emergency medical services and, state-action immunity applies to any claims against the City for federal antitrust violations.

  6. Americare Medservices Inc v. City of LA Habra et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint

    Filed December 29, 2016

    As it would be "unrealistic" for the legislature to set forth every anticompetitive effect, "a state policy to displace federal antitrust law [is] sufficiently expressed where the displacement of competition [is] the inherent, logical, or ordinary result of the exercise of authority delegated by the state legislature." Phoebe, 133 S. Ct. at 1012-13. Here, the EMS Act explicitly sets forth California's policy to displace competition in emergency medical services and, state-action immunity applies to any claims against the City for federal antitrust violations.

  7. Americare Medservices Inc v. City of Fullerton et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint

    Filed December 29, 2016

    As it would be "unrealistic" for the legislature to set forth every anticompetitive effect, "a state policy to displace federal antitrust law [is] sufficiently expressed where the displacement of competition [is] the inherent, logical, or ordinary result of the exercise of authority delegated by the state legislature." Phoebe, 133 S. Ct. at 1012-13. Here, the EMS Act explicitly NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO 55463 00007\29455881 3 - 15 - DISMISS PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT 8: 16-cv-01765-JLS-AFM Case 8:16-cv-01765-JLS-AFM Document 28 Filed 12/29/16 Page 24 of 34 Page ID #:182 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 sets forth California's policy to displace competition in emergency medical services and, state-action immunity applies to any claims against the City for federal antitrust violations.

  8. Americare Medservices Inc v. City of Buena Park et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case

    Filed January 13, 2017

    AAC ¶ 35; BPAC ¶ 34; CMAC ¶ 34; FVAC ¶ 33; FAC ¶ 34; GGAC ¶ 34; LHAC ¶ 33; SCAC ¶ 35. Case 8:16-cv-01832-JLS-AFM Document 28-1 Filed 01/13/17 Page 31 of 45 Page ID #:212 24 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. 8:16-CV-01832-JLS-AFM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Phoebe Putney Health, 568 U.S. ---, 133 S.Ct. 1003, 1010 n.4 (2013) (declining an amicus curiae request to recognize a “market participant” exception to the State Action Doctrine). Second, the vast majority of lower courts, including the Fifth and Eighth Circuits, have concluded that no such exception exists.

  9. Americare Medservices Inc v. City of LA Habra et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case

    Filed January 13, 2017

    AAC ¶ 35; BPAC ¶ 34; CMAC ¶ 34; FVAC ¶ 33; FAC ¶ 34; GGAC ¶ 34; LHAC ¶ 33; SCAC ¶ 35. Case 8:16-cv-01759-JLS-AFM Document 34-1 Filed 01/13/17 Page 31 of 45 Page ID #:250 24 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. 8:16-CV-01759-JLS-AFM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Phoebe Putney Health, 568 U.S. ---, 133 S.Ct. 1003, 1010 n.4 (2013) (declining an amicus curiae request to recognize a “market participant” exception to the State Action Doctrine). Second, the vast majority of lower courts, including the Fifth and Eighth Circuits, have concluded that no such exception exists.

  10. Americare Medservices Inc v. City of Garden Grove et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case

    Filed January 13, 2017

    AAC ¶ 35; BPAC ¶ 34; CMAC ¶ 34; FVAC ¶ 33; FAC ¶ 34; GGAC ¶ 34; LHAC ¶ 33; SCAC ¶ 35. Case 8:16-cv-01806-JLS-AFM Document 28-1 Filed 01/13/17 Page 31 of 45 Page ID #:315 24 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. 8:16-CV-01806-JLS-AFM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Phoebe Putney Health, 568 U.S. ---, 133 S.Ct. 1003, 1010 n.4 (2013) (declining an amicus curiae request to recognize a “market participant” exception to the State Action Doctrine). Second, the vast majority of lower courts, including the Fifth and Eighth Circuits, have concluded that no such exception exists.