Appellate.net

 
home
about the group
appellate attorneys
briefs
docket reports
oral arguments
news
contact
 
30 June 2005

U.S. Court of Appeals Dismisses Price-Fixing Claim in International Vitamins Case

30 June 2005, Washington, D.C. - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has affirmed the dismissal of a price-fixing claim brought in an international vitamins case, ruling that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim. Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP partner Stephen Shapiro argued the case, and partners Tyrone Fahner, Kenneth Geller, Andrew Marovitz, Donald Falk, and Jeffrey Sarles also worked on behalf of defendant BASF Corporation in the case.

The decision in the Empagran case held that plaintiffs could not base their antitrust claims in the United States on conduct that allegedly caused harm outside the United States. The U.S. Court of Appeals dismissed the Sherman Act claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act (FTAIA).

The ruling, which follows the United States Supreme Court's June 14, 2004 decision, affirms the district court's original dismissal of the action. The U.S. Supreme Court in June 2004 ruled 8-0 that federal antitrust law does not apply to transactions causing independent foreign harm that alone gives rise to a plaintiff's claim. Mr. Shapiro had also argued the case on behalf of the defendants before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court remanded the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals to consider an alternate theory of liability. In Tuesday's ruling, the court stated: "We reject the appellants' alternate theory and conclude that we are without subject-matter jurisdiction under the FTAIA."

BASF Corporation was named one of the defendants in the Empagran litigation, a federal class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia purportedly on behalf of all persons who purchased vitamins from the defendants outside the United States over a period of years. The Empagran complaint alleged that the plaintiffs were overcharged on their vitamins purchased as the result of a worldwide conspiracy among the defendants to fix vitamin prices.

Empagran S.A. v. F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd

[ Go Back ]

 
 
© 2014. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved. --  Legal Notices | Attorney Advertising

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the “Mayer Brown Practices”). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. “Mayer Brown” and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.