matsushita
elec
industrial
zenith
radio
argued
november
decided
march
petitioners
japanese
corporations
american
corporations
manufacture
sell
consumer
electronic
products
ceps
primarily
television
sets
respondents
american
corporations
manufacture
sell
television
sets
respondents
brought
action
federal
district
alleging
petitioners
period
illegally
conspired
drive
american
firms
american
cep
market
engaging
scheme
fix
maintain
artificially
high
prices
television
sets
sold
petitioners
japan
time
fix
maintain
low
prices
sets
exported
sold
respondents
claim
various
portions
scheme
violated
inter
alia
sherman
act
act
wilson
tariff
act
several
years
discovery
petitioners
moved
summary
judgment
claims
district
directed
parties
file
statements
listing
documentary
evidence
offered
case
went
trial
statements
filed
found
bulk
evidence
respondents
relied
inadmissible
admissible
evidence
raise
genuine
issue
material
fact
existence
alleged
conspiracy
inference
conspiracy
unreasonable
summary
judgment
therefore
granted
petitioners
favor
appeals
reversed
determining
much
evidence
excluded
district
admissible
appeals
held
district
erred
granting
summary
judgment
direct
circumstantial
evidence
conspiracy
based
inferences
drawn
evidence
appeals
concluded
reasonable
factfinder
find
conspiracy
depress
prices
american
market
order
drive
american
competitors
conspiracy
funded
excess
profits
obtained
japanese
market
held
appeals
apply
proper
standards
evaluating
district
decision
grant
petitioners
motion
summary
judgment
pp
direct
evidence
appeals
relied
petitioners
alleged
supracompetitive
pricing
japan
five
company
rule
japanese
producer
permitted
sell
five
american
distributors
check
prices
minimum
prices
fixed
agreement
japanese
government
ceps
exported
insofar
established
minimum
prices
give
respondents
cognizable
claim
petitioners
antitrust
damages
pp
survive
petitioners
motion
summary
judgment
respondents
must
establish
genuine
issue
material
fact
whether
petitioners
entered
illegal
conspiracy
caused
respondents
suffer
cognizable
injury
factual
context
renders
respondents
claims
implausible
claims
make
economic
sense
respondents
must
offer
persuasive
evidence
support
claims
otherwise
necessary
survive
motion
summary
judgment
plaintiff
seeking
damages
violation
sherman
act
must
present
evidence
tends
exclude
possibility
alleged
conspirators
acted
independently
thus
respondents
must
show
inference
conspiracy
reasonable
light
competing
inferences
independent
action
collusive
action
harmed
respondents
pp
predatory
pricing
conspiracies
nature
speculative
require
conspirators
sustain
substantial
losses
order
recover
uncertain
gains
alleged
conspiracy
therefore
implausible
moreover
record
discloses
alleged
conspiracy
succeeded
two
decades
operation
strong
evidence
conspiracy
fact
exist
possibility
petitioners
obtained
supracompetitive
profits
japanese
market
alter
assessment
pp
mistaken
inferences
cases
one
especially
costly
chill
conduct
antitrust
laws
designed
protect
little
reason
concerned
granting
summary
judgment
cases
evidence
conspiracy
speculative
ambiguous
courts
encourage
conspiracies
pp
appeals
erred
two
respects
direct
evidence
relied
little
relevance
alleged
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
failed
consider
absence
plausible
motive
engage
predatory
pricing
absence
rational
motive
conspire
neither
petitioners
pricing
practices
conduct
japanese
market
agreements
respecting
prices
distributions
american
market
sufficed
create
genuine
issue
trial
federal
rule
civil
procedure
remand
appeals
may
consider
whether
unambiguous
evidence
alleged
conspiracy
pp
powell
delivered
opinion
burger
marshall
rehnquist
joined
white
filed
dissenting
opinion
brennan
blackmun
stevens
joined
post
donald
zoeller
argued
cause
petitioners
briefs
john
altieri
harold
levison
peter
gartland
james
morris
kevin
keating
charles
schirmeister
ira
millstein
paul
victor
jeffrey
kessler
carl
schwarz
michael
friedlander
william
barrett
donald
turner
henry
reath
charles
rule
argued
cause
pro
hac
vice
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
brief
acting
solicitor
general
wallace
charles
stark
robert
nicholson
edward
hand
richard
larm
abraham
sofaer
elizabeth
teel
edwin
rome
argued
cause
respondents
brief
william
roberts
arnold
kalman
philip
curtis
john
borst
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
government
japan
stephen
shapiro
american
association
exporters
importers
et
al
robert
herzstein
hadrian
katz
briefs
amici
curiae
filed
government
australia
et
al
mark
joelson
joseph
griffin
semiconductor
industry
association
joseph
creighton
justice
powell
delivered
opinion
case
requires
consider
standard
district
courts
must
apply
deciding
whether
grant
summary
judgment
antitrust
conspiracy
case
stating
facts
case
daunting
task
opinion
appeals
third
circuit
runs
pages
primary
opinion
district
three
times
long
japanese
electronic
products
antitrust
litigation
supp
ed
two
respected
district
judges
authored
number
opinions
case
published
ones
alone
fill
entire
volume
federal
supplement
addition
parties
filed
appendix
said
contain
essence
evidence
district
appeals
based
respective
decisions
repeat
many
opinions
stated
restated
summarize
mass
documents
constitute
record
appeal
since
review
standard
applied
appeals
deciding
case
weight
assigned
particular
pieces
evidence
find
unnecessary
state
facts
great
detail
follows
summary
case
long
history
petitioners
defendants
corporations
manufacture
sell
consumer
electronic
products
ceps
part
television
sets
petitioners
include
japanese
manufacturers
ceps
american
firms
controlled
japanese
parents
sell
products
respondents
plaintiffs
zenith
radio
corporation
zenith
national
union
electric
corporation
nue
zenith
american
firm
manufactures
sells
television
sets
nue
corporate
successor
emerson
radio
company
american
firm
manufactured
sold
television
sets
withdrew
market
sustaining
substantial
losses
zenith
nue
began
lawsuit
claiming
petitioners
illegally
conspired
drive
american
firms
american
cep
market
according
respondents
gist
conspiracy
scheme
raise
fix
maintain
artificially
high
prices
television
receivers
sold
petitioners
japan
time
fix
maintain
low
prices
television
receivers
exported
sold
quoting
respondents
preliminary
pretrial
memorandum
low
prices
allegedly
levels
produced
substantial
losses
petitioners
conspiracy
allegedly
began
early
according
respondents
full
operation
sometime
late
respondents
claimed
various
portions
scheme
violated
sherman
act
act
wilson
tariff
act
antidumping
act
several
years
detailed
discovery
petitioners
filed
motions
summary
judgment
claims
district
directed
parties
file
preclusive
effect
final
pretrial
statements
listing
documentary
evidence
offered
case
proceeded
trial
respondents
filed
statement
petitioners
responded
series
motions
challenging
admissibility
respondents
evidence
three
detailed
opinions
district
found
bulk
evidence
zenith
nue
relied
inadmissible
district
turned
petitioners
motions
summary
judgment
opinion
spanning
pages
found
admissible
evidence
raise
genuine
issue
material
fact
existence
alleged
conspiracy
bottom
found
respondents
claims
rested
inferences
drawn
petitioners
parallel
conduct
japanese
american
markets
effects
conduct
petitioners
american
competitors
reviewing
evidence
category
toto
found
inference
conspiracy
unreasonable
portions
evidence
suggested
petitioners
conspired
ways
injure
respondents
ii
evidence
bore
directly
alleged
conspiracy
rebut
plausible
inference
petitioners
cutting
prices
compete
american
market
monopolize
summary
judgment
therefore
granted
respondents
claims
sherman
act
wilson
tariff
act
sherman
act
claims
alleged
petitioners
combined
monopolize
american
cep
market
functionally
indistinguishable
claims
dismissed
also
finally
found
act
claims
depended
supposed
conspiracy
sherman
act
claims
since
found
genuine
issue
fact
conspiracy
entered
judgment
petitioners
favor
claims
well
appeals
third
circuit
reversed
began
examining
district
evidentiary
rulings
determined
much
evidence
excluded
district
fact
admissible
evidentiary
rulings
us
see
limiting
grant
certiorari
merits
based
newly
enlarged
record
found
district
summary
judgment
decision
improper
acknowledged
legal
limitations
upon
inferences
may
drawn
circumstantial
evidence
found
legal
problem
different
direct
evidence
concert
action
ibid
concluded
direct
evidence
certain
kinds
concert
action
circumstantial
evidence
tendency
suggest
kinds
concert
action
may
occurred
thus
reasoned
cases
concerning
limitations
inferring
conspiracy
ambiguous
evidence
dispositive
turning
evidence
determined
factfinder
reasonably
draw
following
conclusions
japanese
market
ceps
characterized
oligopolistic
behavior
small
number
producers
meeting
regularly
exchanging
information
price
matters
created
opportunity
stable
combination
raise
prices
profits
japan
american
firms
attack
combination
japanese
government
imposed
significant
barriers
entry
ibid
petitioners
relatively
higher
fixed
costs
american
counterparts
therefore
needed
operate
something
approaching
full
capacity
order
make
profit
ibid
petitioners
plant
capacity
exceeded
needs
japanese
market
ibid
formal
agreements
arranged
cooperation
japan
ministry
international
trade
industry
miti
petitioners
fixed
minimum
prices
ceps
exported
american
market
parties
refer
prices
check
prices
agreements
require
check
price
agreements
petitioners
agreed
distribute
products
according
five
company
rule
japanese
producer
permitted
sell
five
american
distributors
ibid
petitioners
undercut
check
prices
variety
rebate
schemes
petitioners
sought
conceal
rebate
schemes
customs
service
miti
former
avoid
various
customs
regulations
well
action
antidumping
laws
latter
cover
petitioners
violations
agreements
found
unnecessary
address
petitioners
claim
held
liable
antitrust
laws
conduct
compelled
foreign
sovereign
claim
essence
miti
required
petitioners
enter
agreements
liability
premised
agreements
concluded
case
present
issue
sovereign
compulsion
agreements
used
evidence
low
export
price
conspiracy
independent
basis
finding
antitrust
liability
also
believed
unclear
check
prices
fact
mandated
japanese
government
notwithstanding
statement
effect
miti
granted
certiorari
determine
whether
appeals
applied
proper
standards
evaluating
district
decision
grant
petitioners
motion
summary
judgment
ii
whether
petitioners
held
liable
antitrust
laws
conspiracy
part
compelled
foreign
sovereign
reverse
first
issue
reach
second
ii
begin
emphasizing
respondents
claim
respondents
recover
antitrust
damages
based
solely
alleged
cartelization
japanese
market
american
antitrust
laws
regulate
competitive
conditions
nations
economies
aluminum
america
hand
areeda
turner
antitrust
law
respondents
recover
damages
conspiracy
petitioners
charge
higher
competitive
prices
american
market
conduct
indeed
violate
sherman
act
trenton
potteries
oil
injure
respondents
petitioners
competitors
respondents
stand
gain
conspiracy
raise
market
price
ceps
cf
brunswick
pueblo
finally
reason
respondents
recover
conspiracy
impose
restraints
effect
either
raising
market
price
limiting
output
restrictions
though
harmful
competition
actually
benefit
competitors
making
supracompetitive
pricing
attractive
thus
neither
petitioners
alleged
supracompetitive
pricing
japan
five
company
rule
limited
distribution
country
check
prices
insofar
established
minimum
prices
country
give
respondents
cognizable
claim
petitioners
antitrust
damages
appeals
therefore
erred
extent
found
evidence
alleged
conspiracies
direct
evidence
conspiracy
injured
respondents
see
respondents
nevertheless
argue
supposed
conspiracies
grounds
recovery
antitrust
damages
circumstantial
evidence
another
conspiracy
cognizable
conspiracy
monopolize
american
market
means
pricing
market
level
thrust
respondents
argument
petitioners
used
monopoly
profits
japanese
market
fund
concerted
campaign
price
predatorily
thereby
drive
respondents
american
manufacturers
ceps
business
successful
according
respondents
petitioners
cartelize
american
cep
market
restricting
output
raising
prices
level
fair
competition
produce
resulting
monopoly
profits
respondents
contend
compensate
petitioners
losses
incurred
years
pricing
market
level
appeals
found
respondents
allegation
horizontal
conspiracy
engage
predatory
pricing
proved
per
se
violation
sherman
act
petitioners
appeal
conclusion
issue
case
thus
becomes
whether
respondents
adduced
sufficient
evidence
support
theory
survive
summary
judgment
therefore
examine
principles
govern
summary
judgment
determination
iii
survive
petitioners
motion
summary
judgment
respondents
must
establish
genuine
issue
material
fact
whether
petitioners
entered
illegal
conspiracy
caused
respondents
suffer
cognizable
injury
fed
rule
civ
proc
first
national
bank
arizona
cities
service
showing
two
components
first
respondents
must
show
conspiracy
violation
antitrust
laws
must
show
injury
resulting
illegal
conduct
respondents
charge
petitioners
whole
host
conspiracies
restraint
trade
supra
except
alleged
conspiracy
monopolize
american
market
predatory
pricing
alleged
conspiracies
caused
respondents
suffer
antitrust
injury
brunswick
pueblo
actually
tended
benefit
respondents
supra
therefore
unless
context
evidence
conspiracies
raises
genuine
issue
concerning
existence
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
evidence
defeat
petitioners
summary
judgment
motion
second
issue
fact
must
genuine
fed
rules
civ
proc
moving
party
carried
burden
rule
opponent
must
simply
show
metaphysical
doubt
material
facts
see
deluca
atlantic
refining
hand
cert
denied
wright
miller
kane
federal
practice
procedure
clark
special
problems
drafting
interpreting
procedural
codes
rules
vand
rev
cf
sartor
arkansas
natural
gas
language
rule
nonmoving
party
must
come
forward
specific
facts
showing
genuine
issue
trial
fed
rule
civ
proc
emphasis
added
see
also
advisory
committee
note
amendment
fed
rule
civ
proc
purpose
summary
judgment
pierce
pleadings
assess
proof
order
see
whether
genuine
need
trial
record
taken
whole
lead
rational
trier
fact
find
party
genuine
issue
trial
cities
service
supra
follows
settled
principles
factual
context
renders
respondents
claim
implausible
claim
one
simply
makes
economic
sense
respondents
must
come
forward
persuasive
evidence
support
claim
otherwise
necessary
cities
service
instructive
issue
case
whether
proof
defendant
refusal
deal
plaintiff
supported
inference
defendant
willingly
joined
illegal
boycott
economic
factors
strongly
suggested
defendant
motive
join
alleged
conspiracy
acknowledged
isolation
defendant
refusal
deal
might
well
sufficed
create
triable
issue
refusal
deal
evaluated
factual
context
since
defendant
lacked
rational
motive
join
alleged
boycott
since
refusal
deal
consistent
defendant
independent
interest
refusal
deal
support
finding
antitrust
liability
respondents
correctly
note
summary
judgment
inferences
drawn
underlying
facts
must
viewed
light
favorable
party
opposing
motion
diebold
antitrust
law
limits
range
permissible
inferences
ambiguous
evidence
case
thus
monsanto
service
held
conduct
consistent
permissible
competition
illegal
conspiracy
standing
alone
support
inference
antitrust
conspiracy
see
also
cities
service
supra
survive
motion
summary
judgment
directed
verdict
plaintiff
seeking
damages
violation
must
present
evidence
tends
exclude
possibility
alleged
conspirators
acted
independently
respondents
case
words
must
show
inference
conspiracy
reasonable
light
competing
inferences
independent
action
collusive
action
harmed
respondents
see
cities
service
supra
petitioners
argue
principles
apply
fully
case
according
petitioners
alleged
conspiracy
one
economically
irrational
practically
infeasible
consequently
petitioners
contend
motive
engage
alleged
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
indeed
strong
motive
conspire
manner
respondents
allege
petitioners
argue
light
absence
apparent
motive
ambiguous
nature
evidence
conspiracy
trier
fact
reasonably
find
conspiracy
petitioners
charged
actually
existed
argument
requires
us
consider
nature
alleged
conspiracy
practical
obstacles
implementation
iv
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
nature
speculative
agreement
price
competitive
level
requires
conspirators
forgo
profits
free
competition
offer
forgone
profits
may
considered
investment
future
investment
rational
conspirators
must
reasonable
expectation
recovering
form
later
monopoly
profits
losses
suffered
bork
discussing
predatory
pricing
single
firm
explained
realistic
theory
predation
recognizes
predator
well
victims
incur
losses
fighting
theory
supposes
may
rational
calculation
predator
view
losses
investment
future
monopoly
profits
rivals
killed
future
undisturbed
profits
rivals
disciplined
future
flow
profits
appropriately
discounted
must
exceed
present
size
losses
bork
antitrust
paradox
observations
apply
even
predatory
pricing
single
firm
seeking
monopoly
power
case
respondents
allege
large
number
firms
conspired
period
many
years
charge
prices
order
stifle
competition
conspiracy
incalculably
difficult
execute
analogous
plan
undertaken
single
predator
conspirators
must
allocate
losses
sustained
conspiracy
operation
must
also
allocate
gains
realized
success
precisely
success
speculative
depends
willingness
endure
losses
indefinite
period
conspirator
strong
incentive
cheat
letting
partners
suffer
losses
necessary
destroy
competition
sharing
gains
conspiracy
succeeds
necessary
allocation
therefore
difficult
accomplish
yet
conspirators
cheat
substantial
extent
conspiracy
must
fail
success
depends
depressing
market
price
buyers
ceps
goods
artificially
low
price
satisfy
demand
victims
conspiracy
continue
sell
real
market
price
conspirators
suffer
losses
little
purpose
finally
predatory
pricing
conspiracies
generally
unlikely
occur
especially
prospects
attaining
monopoly
power
seem
slight
order
recoup
losses
petitioners
must
obtain
enough
market
power
set
higher
competitive
prices
must
sustain
prices
long
enough
earn
excess
profits
earlier
gave
prices
see
northeastern
telephone
american
telephone
telegraph
supra
areeda
turner
harv
two
decades
conspiracy
alleged
commenced
petitioners
appear
far
achieving
goal
two
largest
shares
retail
market
television
sets
held
rca
respondent
zenith
petitioners
app
brief
appellant
pp
moreover
shares
together
approximate
sales
decline
appreciably
ibid
petitioners
collective
share
rose
rapidly
period
less
relevant
markets
close
neither
district
appeals
found
however
petitioners
share
presently
allows
charge
monopoly
prices
contrary
respondents
contend
conspiracy
ongoing
petitioners
still
artificially
depressing
market
price
order
drive
zenith
market
data
record
strongly
suggest
goal
yet
far
distant
alleged
conspiracy
failure
achieve
ends
two
decades
asserted
operation
strong
evidence
conspiracy
fact
exist
since
losses
conspiracy
accrue
gains
must
repaid
interest
alleged
losses
accrued
course
two
decades
conspirators
well
require
correspondingly
long
time
recoup
maintaining
supracompetitive
prices
turn
depends
continued
cooperation
conspirators
inability
competitors
enter
market
incidentally
conspirators
ability
escape
antitrust
liability
minimum
cartel
factors
weighs
heavily
time
needed
recoup
losses
grows
losses
substantial
likely
necessary
order
drive
competition
petitioners
likely
sustain
cartel
years
simply
break
even
possibility
petitioners
obtained
supracompetitive
profits
japanese
market
change
calculation
whether
petitioners
means
sustain
substantial
losses
country
long
period
time
motive
sustain
losses
absent
strong
likelihood
alleged
conspiracy
country
eventually
pay
courts
found
evidence
success
indicated
facts
actually
contrary
rca
zenith
petitioners
continue
hold
largest
share
american
retail
market
color
television
sets
important
nothing
suggest
relationship
petitioners
profits
japan
amount
petitioners
expect
gain
conspiracy
monopolize
american
market
absence
evidence
possible
existence
supracompetitive
profits
japan
simply
overcome
economic
obstacles
ultimate
success
alleged
predatory
conspiracy
monsanto
emphasized
courts
permit
factfinders
infer
conspiracies
inferences
implausible
effect
practices
often
deter
procompetitive
conduct
monsanto
respondents
petitioners
competitors
seek
hold
petitioners
liable
damages
caused
alleged
conspiracy
cut
prices
moreover
seek
establish
conspiracy
indirectly
evidence
combinations
agreements
five
company
rule
whose
natural
tendency
raise
prices
evidence
rebates
activities
respondents
argue
tend
prove
combination
suppress
prices
cutting
prices
order
increase
business
often
essence
competition
thus
mistaken
inferences
cases
one
especially
costly
chill
conduct
antitrust
laws
designed
protect
see
monsanto
supra
must
concerned
lest
rule
precedent
authorizes
search
particular
type
undesirable
pricing
behavior
end
discouraging
legitimate
price
competition
barry
wright
itt
grinnell
cases
concern
must
balanced
desire
illegal
conspiracies
identified
punished
balance
however
unusually
cases
one
earlier
explained
supra
predatory
pricing
schemes
require
conspirators
suffer
losses
order
eventually
realize
illegal
gains
moreover
gains
depend
host
uncertainties
making
schemes
likely
fail
succeed
economic
realities
tend
make
predatory
pricing
conspiracies
unlike
conduct
violates
antitrust
laws
failed
predatory
pricing
schemes
costly
conspirators
see
easterbrook
limits
antitrust
texas
rev
finally
unlike
predatory
pricing
single
firm
successful
predatory
pricing
conspiracies
involving
large
number
firms
identified
punished
succeed
since
form
minimum
agreement
necessary
order
reap
benefits
predation
thus
little
reason
concerned
granting
summary
judgment
cases
evidence
conspiracy
speculative
ambiguous
courts
encourage
conspiracies
discussion
part
shows
petitioners
motive
enter
alleged
conspiracy
contrary
presumably
rational
businesses
petitioners
every
incentive
engage
conduct
charged
likely
effect
generate
losses
petitioners
corresponding
gains
cf
cities
service
appeals
take
account
absence
plausible
motive
enter
alleged
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
focused
instead
whether
direct
evidence
concert
action
appeals
erred
two
respects
direct
evidence
relied
little
relevance
alleged
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
ii
failed
consider
absence
plausible
motive
engage
predatory
pricing
direct
evidence
relied
evidence
combinations
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
evidence
petitioners
conspired
raise
prices
japan
provides
little
support
respondents
claims
conspiracy
increase
profits
one
market
tend
show
conspiracy
sustain
losses
another
evidence
petitioners
agreed
fix
minimum
prices
agreements
american
market
actually
works
petitioners
favor
suggests
petitioners
seeking
place
floor
prices
rather
lower
true
evidence
petitioners
agreed
limit
number
distributors
products
american
market
five
company
rule
practice
may
facilitated
horizontal
territorial
allocation
see
topco
associates
natural
effect
raise
market
prices
rather
reduce
evidence
tends
support
collateral
conspiracies
thus
says
little
anything
existence
conspiracy
charge
prices
american
market
period
two
decades
case
absence
plausible
motive
engage
conduct
charged
highly
relevant
whether
genuine
issue
trial
exists
within
meaning
rule
lack
motive
bears
range
permissible
conclusions
might
drawn
ambiguous
evidence
petitioners
rational
economic
motive
conspire
conduct
consistent
equally
plausible
explanations
conduct
give
rise
inference
conspiracy
see
cities
service
supra
conduct
question
consists
largely
pricing
levels
succeeded
taking
business
away
respondents
ii
arrangements
may
limited
petitioners
ability
compete
thus
kept
prices
going
even
lower
conduct
suggests
either
petitioners
behaved
competitively
petitioners
conspired
raise
prices
neither
possibility
consistent
agreement
among
companies
price
market
levels
moreover
predatory
pricing
scheme
conduct
said
prove
one
makes
practical
sense
calls
petitioners
destroy
companies
larger
better
established
goal
remains
far
distant
two
decades
conspiracy
birth
even
succeeded
obtaining
monopoly
nothing
record
suggest
recover
losses
need
sustain
along
way
sum
light
absence
rational
motive
conspire
neither
petitioners
pricing
practices
conduct
japanese
market
agreements
respecting
prices
distribution
american
market
suffice
create
genuine
issue
trial
fed
rule
civ
proc
remand
appeals
free
consider
whether
evidence
sufficiently
unambiguous
permit
trier
fact
find
petitioners
conspired
price
predatorily
two
decades
despite
absence
apparent
motive
evidence
must
ten
exclude
possibility
petitioners
underpriced
respondents
compete
business
rather
implement
economically
senseless
conspiracy
monsanto
absence
evidence
genuine
issue
trial
rule
petitioners
entitled
summary
judgment
reinstated
vi
decision
makes
unnecessary
reach
sovereign
compulsion
issue
heart
petitioners
argument
issue
miti
agency
government
japan
required
petitioners
fix
minimum
prices
export
petitioners
therefore
immune
antitrust
liability
scheme
minimum
prices
integral
part
discussed
part
ii
supra
respondents
suffered
cognizable
injury
action
raised
prices
american
cep
market
liable
petitioners
liable
conduct
distinct
agreements
sovereign
compulsion
question
petitioners
solicitor
general
urge
us
decide
thus
presented
decision
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
inadmissible
evidence
included
various
government
records
reports
zenith
radio
matsushita
electric
industrial
supp
ed
business
documents
offered
pursuant
various
hearsay
exceptions
zenith
radio
matsushita
electric
industrial
supp
ed
large
portion
expert
testimony
respondents
proposed
introduce
zenith
radio
matsushita
electric
industrial
supp
ed
district
ruled
separately
petitioners
entitled
summary
judgment
respondents
claims
antidumping
act
zenith
radio
matsushita
electric
industrial
supp
ed
respondents
appealed
ruling
appeals
reversed
separate
opinion
issued
day
opinion
concerning
respondents
claims
japanese
electronic
products
antitrust
litigation
petitioners
ask
us
review
appeals
antidumping
act
decision
along
decision
rest
mammoth
case
antidumping
act
claims
however
mentioned
questions
presented
petition
certiorari
independently
argued
parties
see
rule
therefore
decline
invitation
review
appeals
decision
claims
defendants
appeals
affirmed
entry
summary
judgment
petitioners
defendants
remain
case
addition
inferences
noted
expert
opinion
evidence
petitioners
export
sales
generally
prices
produced
losses
often
high
percent
sales
identify
direct
evidence
pricing
place
particularly
heavy
reliance
aspect
expert
evidence
see
infra
sherman
act
reach
conduct
outside
borders
conduct
effect
american
commerce
continental
ore
union
carbide
carbon
conspiracy
monopolize
restrain
domestic
foreign
commerce
outside
reach
sherman
act
part
conduct
complained
occurs
foreign
countries
effect
respondents
rely
artificially
depressed
level
prices
ceps
petitioners
alleged
cartelization
japanese
market
caused
effect
period
two
decades
petitioners
decided
respondents
allege
reduce
output
raise
prices
japanese
market
option
either
producing
fewer
goods
selling
goods
markets
plausible
conclusion
petitioners
chose
latter
option
profitable
former
choice
flow
cartelization
japanese
market
contrary
japanese
market
perfectly
competitive
petitioners
still
choose
whether
sell
goods
still
presumably
make
choice
based
profit
expectations
reason
respondents
theory
recovery
depends
proof
asserted
conspiracy
country
respondents
also
argue
check
prices
five
company
rule
includes
monopolization
american
market
predatory
pricing
argument
mistaken
however
one
decides
describe
contours
asserted
conspiracy
whether
one
conspiracy
several
respondents
must
show
conspiracy
caused
injury
antitrust
laws
provide
relief
associated
general
contractors
california
carpenters
brunswick
pueblo
see
also
note
antitrust
standing
antitrust
injury
per
se
standard
yale
showing
depends
turn
proof
petitioners
conspired
price
predatorily
american
market
since
conduct
involved
alleged
conspiracy
caused
injury
throughout
opinion
refer
asserted
conspiracy
one
price
predatorily
term
used
chiefly
cases
single
firm
dominant
share
relevant
market
cuts
prices
order
force
competitors
market
perhaps
deter
potential
entrants
coming
southern
pacific
communications
american
telephone
telegraph
app
cert
denied
cases
predatory
pricing
means
pricing
appropriate
measure
cost
barry
wright
itt
grinnell
see
utah
pie
continental
baking
good
deal
debate
cases
law
reviews
cost
relevant
cases
need
resolve
debate
unlike
cases
cited
sherman
act
case
purposes
case
enough
note
respondents
suffered
antitrust
injury
unless
petitioners
conspired
drive
respondents
relevant
markets
pricing
level
necessary
sell
products
ii
pricing
appropriate
measure
cost
agreement
without
features
either
leave
respondents
position
market
forces
actually
benefit
respondents
raising
market
prices
respondents
therefore
may
complain
conspiracies
example
set
maximum
prices
market
levels
set
minimum
prices
level
consider
whether
recovery
ever
available
theory
respondents
pricing
question
measure
incremental
cost
see
generally
areeda
turner
predatory
pricing
related
practices
section
sherman
act
harv
rev
discussing
test
use
cases
practical
matter
may
direct
evidence
pricing
sufficient
overcome
strong
inference
rational
businesses
enter
conspiracies
one
see
part
infra
respondents
argued
district
petitioners
failed
carry
initial
burden
federal
rule
civil
procedure
demonstrating
absence
genuine
issue
material
fact
see
adickes
kress
cf
catrett
sales
app
cert
granted
issue
resolved
petitioners
favor
us
rule
provides
relevant
part
motion
summary
judgment
made
supported
provided
rule
adverse
party
may
rest
upon
mere
allegations
denials
pleading
response
affidavits
otherwise
provided
rule
must
set
forth
specific
facts
showing
genuine
issue
trial
respond
summary
judgment
appropriate
shall
entered
see
supra
nue
complaint
alleges
petitioners
conspiracy
began
early
starting
date
used
zenith
complaint
nue
complaint
zenith
complaint
period
number
american
firms
manufacturing
television
sets
declined
app
brief
appellant
decline
continued
trend
began
least
petitioners
sales
market
negligible
ibid
see
zenith
complaint
respondents
offer
reason
suppose
entry
relevant
market
especially
difficult
yet
without
barriers
entry
presumably
impossible
maintain
supracompetitive
prices
extended
time
judge
easterbrook
commenting
case
law
review
article
offers
following
sensible
assessment
plaintiffs
case
maintain
last
fifteen
years
least
ten
japanese
manufacturers
sold
tv
sets
less
cost
order
drive
firms
business
conduct
possibly
produce
profits
harming
competition
however
japanese
firms
drive
firms
business
recoup
fifteen
years
losses
made
high
prices
indefinite
future
losses
like
investments
must
recovered
compound
interest
defendants
try
raise
prices
level
attract
new
competition
barriers
entry
electronics
proliferation
computer
audio
firms
shows
competition
come
resurgent
firms
foreign
firms
korea
many
nations
make
tv
sets
defendants
order
recoup
japanese
firms
need
suppress
competition
among
plaintiffs
theory
cartel
need
last
least
thirty
years
far
longer
history
even
cartels
illegal
none
sanguine
prospects
cartel
given
firm
incentive
shave
price
expand
share
sales
predation
recoupment
story
therefore
make
sense
left
plausible
inference
japanese
firms
sell
cost
first
place
engaged
hard
competition
limits
antitrust
texas
rev
footnotes
omitted
alleged
predatory
scheme
makes
sense
petitioners
recoup
losses
light
large
number
firms
involved
petitioners
achieve
engaging
form
price
fixing
succeeded
driving
competitors
market
price
fixing
course
independent
violation
sherman
act
oil
predators
losses
must
actually
increase
conspiracy
nears
objective
greater
predators
market
share
products
predators
sell
since
every
sale
brings
loss
increase
market
share
also
means
increase
predatory
losses
true
supposed
excess
production
capacity
petitioners
may
possessed
existence
plant
capacity
exceeds
domestic
demand
tend
establish
ability
sell
products
abroad
however
provide
motive
selling
prices
lower
necessary
obtain
sales
explain
petitioners
willing
lose
money
market
without
reasonable
prospect
recouping
investment
respondents
also
rely
expert
study
suggesting
petitioners
sold
products
american
market
substantial
losses
relevant
study
based
actual
cost
data
rather
consists
expert
opinion
based
mathematical
construction
turn
rests
assumptions
petitioners
costs
district
analyzed
assumptions
detail
found
implausible
inconsistent
record
evidence
zenith
radio
matsushita
electric
industrial
although
appeals
reversed
district
finding
expert
report
inadmissible
disturb
district
analysis
factors
substantially
undermine
probative
value
evidence
see
find
district
analysis
persuasive
accordingly
view
expert
opinion
evidence
pricing
little
probative
value
comparison
economic
factors
discussed
part
supra
suggest
conduct
irrational
appeals
correctly
reasoned
five
company
rule
might
tend
insulate
petitioners
competition
effect
irrelevant
conspiracy
price
predatorily
petitioners
incentive
underprice
already
pricing
level
sell
goods
far
plausible
inference
customer
allocation
agreement
five
company
rule
petitioners
conspiring
raise
prices
limiting
ability
take
sales
away
respondents
petitioners
competitors
suffer
harm
conspiracy
raise
prices
supra
moreover
seems
unlikely
five
company
rule
significant
effect
kind
since
rule
permitted
petitioners
sell
american
subsidiaries
limit
number
distributors
subsidiaries
resell
imply
petitioners
plausible
reason
conspire
ambiguous
conduct
suffice
create
triable
issue
conspiracy
decision
monsanto
service
establishes
conduct
consistent
permissible
competition
illegal
conspiracy
without
support
even
inference
conspiracy
see
supra
justice
white
justice
brennan
justice
blackmun
justice
stevens
join
dissenting
indeed
remarkable
face
long
careful
opinion
appeals
reaches
result
appeals
faithfully
followed
relevant
precedents
including
first
national
bank
arizona
cities
service
monsanto
service
kept
firmly
mind
principle
proof
conspiracy
fragmented
see
continental
ore
union
carbide
carbon
surveying
massive
record
including
significant
evidence
district
erroneously
excluded
appeals
concluded
evidence
taken
whole
creates
genuine
issue
fact
whether
petitioners
engaged
conspiracy
violation
sherman
act
act
view
appeals
opinion
adequately
supports
judgment
opinion
today
far
identifying
reversible
error
muddies
waters
first
place
makes
confusing
inconsistent
statements
appropriate
standard
granting
summary
judgment
second
makes
number
assumptions
invade
factfinder
province
third
faults
third
circuit
nonexistent
errors
remands
case
although
plain
respondents
evidence
raises
genuine
issues
material
fact
initial
discussion
summary
judgment
standards
appears
consistent
settled
doctrine
agree
record
taken
whole
lead
rational
trier
fact
find
nonmoving
party
genuine
issue
trial
ante
quoting
cities
service
supra
also
agree
summary
judgment
inferences
drawn
underlying
facts
must
viewed
light
favorable
party
opposing
motion
ante
quoting
diebold
language
opinion
suggests
departure
traditional
summary
judgment
doctrine
thus
gives
following
critique
third
circuit
opinion
appeals
concluded
reasonable
factfinder
find
conspiracy
depress
prices
american
market
order
drive
american
competitors
conspiracy
funded
excess
profits
obtained
japanese
market
apparently
consider
whether
plausible
conclude
petitioners
behavior
independent
conspiratorial
ante
intends
give
every
judge
hearing
motion
summary
judgment
antitrust
case
job
determining
evidence
makes
inference
conspiracy
probable
overturning
settled
law
intend
pronouncement
refrain
using
unnecessarily
broad
confusing
language
ii
defining
respondents
must
show
order
recover
makes
assumptions
invade
factfinder
province
little
discussion
respondents
recover
sherman
act
prove
petitioners
conspired
drive
respondents
relevant
markets
pricing
level
necessary
sell
products
ii
pricing
appropriate
measure
cost
ante
statement
premised
assumption
agreement
without
features
either
leave
respondents
position
market
forces
actually
benefit
respondents
raising
market
prices
ibid
making
assumption
ignores
contrary
conclusions
respondents
expert
depodwin
whose
report
relevant
part
erroneously
excluded
district
depodwin
report
appeals
relied
along
material
indicates
respondents
harmed
two
ways
independent
whether
petitioners
priced
products
level
necessary
sell
products
appropriate
measure
cost
ibid
first
report
explains
scheme
japan
resulted
lower
consumption
petitioners
goods
country
exporting
petitioners
goods
country
occurred
prices
japan
competitive
level
increasing
exports
country
resulted
depressed
prices
harmed
respondents
second
depodwin
report
indicates
petitioners
exchanged
confidential
proprietary
information
entered
agreements
five
company
rule
goal
avoiding
intragroup
competition
market
report
explains
petitioners
restrictions
intragroup
competition
caused
respondents
lose
business
lost
petitioners
competed
one
another
depodwin
report
alone
creates
genuine
factual
issue
regarding
harm
respondents
caused
japanese
cartelization
agreements
restricting
competition
among
petitioners
country
doubt
prefers
economic
theorizing
depodwin
reason
deny
factfinder
opportunity
consider
depodwin
views
petitioners
alleged
collusion
harmed
respondents
discussing
unlikelihood
predatory
conspiracy
also
consistently
assumes
petitioners
valued
growth
see
ante
light
evidence
petitioners
sold
goods
country
substantial
losses
long
period
time
see
part
infra
believe
assumption
argued
factfinder
decided
iii
reversing
third
circuit
judgment
identifies
two
alleged
errors
direct
evidence
appeals
relied
little
relevance
alleged
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
ii
failed
consider
absence
plausible
motive
engage
predatory
pricing
ante
position
without
substance
first
claim
error
third
circuit
treated
evidence
regarding
price
fixing
japan
five
company
rule
check
prices
direct
evidence
conspiracy
injured
respondents
ante
citing
japanese
electronics
products
antitrust
litigation
passage
third
circuit
opinion
locates
alleged
error
makes
consider
quite
simple
correct
observation
namely
case
distinguishable
traditional
conscious
parallelism
cases
direct
evidence
concert
action
among
petitioners
ibid
third
circuit
implies
jump
unthinkingly
observation
conclusion
evidence
regarding
five
company
rule
support
finding
antitrust
injury
respondents
third
circuit
twice
specifically
noted
horizontal
agreements
allocating
customers
though
illegal
ordinarily
injure
competitors
agreeing
parties
however
reviewing
evidence
cartel
activity
japan
collusive
establishment
dumping
prices
country
longterm
sales
third
circuit
held
factfinder
reasonably
conclude
five
company
rule
simple
device
factfinder
might
reasonably
infer
allocation
customers
combined
japan
intended
permit
concentration
effects
dumping
upon
american
competitors
eliminating
competition
among
japanese
manufacturers
either
market
second
charge
error
third
circuit
sufficiently
skeptical
respondents
allegation
petitioners
engaged
predatory
pricing
conspiracy
third
circuit
required
engage
academic
discussions
predation
required
decide
whether
respondents
evidence
creates
genuine
issue
material
fact
third
circuit
job
remanding
case
job
simply
pointless
third
circuit
indicated
considers
respondents
evidence
sufficient
create
genuine
factual
issue
regarding
sales
petitioners
ibid
tries
whittle
away
conclusion
suggesting
expert
opinion
evidence
pricing
little
probative
value
comparison
economic
factors
suggest
conduct
irrational
ante
question
whether
finds
respondents
experts
persuasive
prefers
district
analysis
whether
viewing
evidence
light
favorable
respondents
jury
factfinder
reasonably
conclude
petitioners
engaged
sales
agree
third
circuit
answer
question
yes
misleading
state
appeals
disturb
district
analysis
factors
substantially
undermine
probative
value
evidence
depodwin
report
respecting
sales
ibid
third
circuit
held
exclusion
portion
depodwin
report
regarding
pricing
erroneous
trial
ignored
depodwin
uncontradicted
affidavit
data
relied
report
type
experts
field
reasonably
rely
short
third
circuit
found
depodwin
affidavit
sufficient
create
genuine
factual
issue
regarding
correctness
conclusion
petitioners
sold
cost
long
period
time
made
determination
saw
need
address
district
analysis
point
point
district
criticisms
depodwin
methods
arguments
factfinder
consider
iv
believe
third
circuit
correct
holding
respondents
demonstrated
existence
genuine
issues
material
fact
affirm
judgment
remand
case
trial
adequately
summarizes
quite
holding
cities
service
ante
monsanto
held
manufacturer
termination
distributor
receiving
complaint
another
distributor
standing
alone
sufficient
create
jury
question
understand
holding
important
realize
colgate
permissible
manufacturer
announce
retail
prices
advance
terminate
fail
comply
dr
miles
medical
john
park
sons
impermissible
manufacturer
distributors
agree
price
distributors
sell
goods
thus
manufacturer
termination
distributor
receiving
complaint
another
distributor
lawful
colgate
unless
termination
pursuant
shared
understanding
manufacturer
distributors
respecting
enforcement
resale
price
maintenance
scheme
monsanto
holds
establish
liability
dr
miles
needed
evidence
behavior
consistent
distributor
exercise
prerogatives
colgate
thus
must
evidence
tends
exclude
possibility
manufacturer
nonterminated
distributors
acting
independently
monsanto
hold
terminated
dealer
produces
evidence
conspiracy
beyond
bare
fact
postcomplaint
termination
judge
hearing
motion
summary
judgment
balance
evidence
pointing
toward
conspiracy
evidence
pointing
toward
independent
action
depodwin
summarizes
view
harm
caused
japanese
cartelization
follows
consider
injuries
inflicted
producers
must
look
japanese
television
manufacturers
export
agreement
part
generally
collusive
scheme
embracing
japanese
domestic
market
well
scheme
increased
supply
television
receivers
market
restricting
supply
japanese
market
japanese
manufacturers
competed
domestic
export
markets
sold
domestic
market
less
greater
proportion
japanese
production
capacity
devoted
domestic
sales
domestic
prices
lower
export
prices
higher
size
price
differential
domestic
export
markets
diminished
practically
vanishing
point
consequently
competition
among
japanese
producers
markets
resulted
reducing
exports
prices
risen
addition
investment
industry
increased
however
influx
sets
depressed
prices
cut
rates
return
television
receiver
production
facilities
low
level
make
investment
uneconomic
therefore
conclude
american
manufacturers
television
receivers
made
larger
sales
higher
prices
absence
japanese
cartel
agreements
thus
collusive
behavior
japanese
television
manufacturers
resulted
severe
injury
american
television
manufacturers
particularly
national
union
electric
corporation
produced
preponderance
television
sets
screen
sizes
nineteen
inches
lower
especially
lower
range
prices
app
brief
appellants
pp
depodwin
report
among
things
say
summarizing
harm
respondents
caused
five
company
rule
exchange
production
data
price
coordination
allegedly
practices
petitioners
impact
japanese
practices
manufacturers
evident
one
considers
nature
competition
market
fully
competitive
firms
pit
resources
one
another
attempt
secure
business
individual
customers
however
firms
collude
violate
basic
tenet
competitive
behavior
act
independently
firms
confronted
japanese
competitors
collusively
seeking
destroy
established
customer
relationships
japanese
company
targeted
customers
service
reasonable
assurance
fellow
japanese
cartel
members
become
involved
importantly
japanese
firm
assured
already
low
price
level
japanese
television
receivers
market
depressed
actions
japanese
associates
result
phenomenal
growth
exports
particularly
concurrently
japanese
manufacturers
defendants
particular
made
large
investments
new
plant
equipment
expanded
production
capacity
obvious
therefore
effect
japanese
cartel
concerted
actions
generate
larger
volume
investment
japanese
television
industry
otherwise
case
added
capacity
enabled
encouraged
japanese
penetrate
market
deeply
competed
lawfully
holding
parts
iv
report
improperly
excluded
appeals
said
trial
found
depodwin
use
economic
expertise
reaching
opinion
defendants
participated
japanese
television
cartel
supp
examined
excluded
portions
parts
iv
light
admitted
portions
conclude
finding
clearly
erroneous
result
also
held
opinions
unhelpful
factfinder
effect
eliminate
parts
report
expert
economist
describing
conditions
respective
markets
opportunities
collusion
evidence
pointing
collusion
terms
certain
undisputed
agreements
market
behavior
expressed
opinion
concert
action
consistent
plaintiffs
conspiracy
theory
considering
complexity
economic
issues
involved
simply
said
opinion
help
trier
fact
understand
evidence
determine
fact
issue
japanese
electronics
products
antitrust
litigation
use
third
circuit
analysis
five
company
rule
way
example
equally
careful
analysis
parts
cartel
activity
japan
check
prices
played
actionable
conspiracy
see
generally
discussing
rule
mean
imply
conclusion
validity
petitioners
sovereign
compulsion
defense
since
reach
issue
see
need
addressing