[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-511270-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-511270-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","antitrust-law-unit-6-conspiracy-and-dispositive-motions-procedure-version-spring-2022","ANTITRUST LAW - Unit 6: Conspiracy and Dispositive Motions - Procedure Version - Spring 2022","","Course procedure materials on antitrust law covering Unit 6: conspiracy and dispositive motions. The document outlines the elements of Sherman Act Section 1, emphasizing plurality and agreement as required for an illegal restraint of trade. It explains that Section 1 targets concerted action rather than unilateral conduct, and highlights how the plurality capacity to conspire is assessed under the Copperweld doctrine. It also surveys dispositive motion topics including motions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 and 56, summary judgment standards, and related appellate review themes.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/antitrust-law-unit-6-conspiracy-and-dispositive-motions-procedure-version-spring-2022/511270/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/antitrust-law-unit-6-conspiracy-and-dispositive-motions-procedure-version-spring-2022/511270.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Blue Pony","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-06",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":33},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What are the required elements for a Section 1 antitrust violation?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"A Section 1 violation requires a plurality of actors with legal capacity to conspire, an agreement among the actors, and a restraint of trade or commerce that is unreasonable under antitrust laws.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How does the document distinguish concerted action from unilateral conduct under Section 1?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"Section 1 applies only to concerted action, which requires plurality. It has no application to unilateral conduct, and the focus is on the illegal agreement rather than overt acts.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What does the Copperweld doctrine say about capacity to conspire?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"Copperweld requires that entities have legal capacity to conspire, meaning they must be capable of depriving the marketplace of independent centers of decisionmaking. Internal agreements implementing a single firm’s policies generally do not raise the antitrust dangers targeted by Section 1.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},511270,1792590458,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,94,99,104,109,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":92,"slug":93},70,"exam",{"id":95,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":96,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":98},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":100,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":105,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":95,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":33,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":89,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},962090760266,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","ANTITRUST LAW  \nUnit 6: Conspiracy and Dispositive Motions  \nProcedure Version  \nProfessor Dale Collins Georgetown University Law Center Spring 2022  \nTable of Contents  \nIntroduction  \nPROCEDURE VERSION  \nThe Law of Antitrust Conspiracy........................................................................... 5  \nDispositive motions  \nFed. R. Civ. P. 12 (Defenses and Objections) ...................................................... 12  \nFed. R. Civ. P. 56 (Summary Judgment) ............................................................. 14  \nS.D.N.Y./E.D.N.Y/ Loc. R. 56.1 (Statements of Material Facts on Motion for Summary Judgment) ................................................................... 16  \nFed. R. Civ. P. 50 (Judgment as a Matter of Law) ............................................... 16  \nMore on motions to dismiss  \nDeciding motions to dismiss: In re Lithium Ion Batteries Antitrust Litig., No. 13–Md–2420 Ygr, 2014WL 309192 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2014)(excerpt) ........................................................................................................ 19  \nStandard of review on appeal  \nIn re Adderall XR Antitrust Litig., 754 F.3D 128 (2d Cir. 2014) (excerpt) ...20 SD3, LLC V. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc., 801 F.3D 412, 422 (4th Cir.  \n2015) (excerpt) .........................................................................................21  \nIn re Pre-Filled Propane Tank Antitrust Litig., 860 F.3D 1059, 1063  \n(8th Cir. 2017) ..........................................................................................21  \nA note on motions to dismiss in antitrust cases ................................................... 22  \nMore on summary judgment motions  \nDeciding summary judgment motions:  \nIn re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litig., No. 1917, 2017 WL 5972721 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2017) (excerpt)...........................34  \nIn re Flat Glass Antitrust Litig. (II), MDL No. 1942, 2014 WL 4384534 (W.D. Pa. Sept. 4, 2014) (excerpt)............................................................35  \nIn re Dairy Farmers of America, Inc., Cheese Antitrust Litig., Master File No. 9 Cr 3690, 2014 WL 4083938 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 18, 2014) (excerpt) ...........................................................................36  \nStandard of review on appeal In re Publication Paper Antitrust Litig., 690 F.3d 51 (2d Cir. 2012)(excerpt) ....................................................................................................38  \nIn re Chocolate Confectionary Antitrust Litig., 801 F.3D 383 (3d Cir. 2015) (excerpt) .........................................................................................39  \nA note on summary judgment motions in antitrust cases..................................... 41  \nRule 54(b) partial judgments  \nIntroduction .......................................................................................................... 52  \nFed. R.Civ. P. 54 (judgment; costs) ..................................................................... 53  \nOrder Granting Motion for Rule 54(b) Certification, In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litig., No. 3:07-cv-05944-JST (N.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2016) .................................................................................................. 54  \nUnaccepted invitations to collude  \nComplaint, United States v. American Airlines, Civ. No. CA 3 83-0325D (N.D. Tex. filed Feb. 23, 1983) .................................................................... 60  \nComplaint, In re Alifraghis, No. C-4483 (F.T.C. Aug. 20, 2014) ....................... 71  \nIntroduction  \nTHE LAW OF ANTITRUST CONSPIRACY  \nSection 1 of the Sherman Act provides that “[e]very contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, is declared to be illegal.”1 A violation of Section 1 requires a showing of four distinct elements: (1) a plurality of actors with the legal capacity to conspire with one another","cbCaijTODcsTLt7w","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaijTODcsTLt7w","pdf",2206659,"English","# Introduction\n# PROCEDURE VERSION\n## The Law of Antitrust Conspiracy\n## Dispositive motions\n## More on motions to dismiss\n## Standard of review on appeal\n## More on summary judgment motions\n## Rule 54(b) partial judgments\n## Unaccepted invitations to collude\n# THE LAW OF ANTITRUST CONSPIRACY\n## Section 1 elements and plurality\n## Copperweld capacity to conspire","[{\"question\":\"What are the required elements for a Section 1 antitrust violation?\",\"answer\":\"A Section 1 violation requires a plurality of actors with legal capacity to conspire, an agreement among the actors, and a restraint of trade or commerce that is unreasonable under antitrust laws.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the document distinguish concerted action from unilateral conduct under Section 1?\",\"answer\":\"Section 1 applies only to concerted action, which requires plurality. It has no application to unilateral conduct, and the focus is on the illegal agreement rather than overt acts.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the Copperweld doctrine say about capacity to conspire?\",\"answer\":\"Copperweld requires that entities have legal capacity to conspire, meaning they must be capable of depriving the marketplace of independent centers of decisionmaking. Internal agreements implementing a single firm’s policies generally do not raise the antitrust dangers targeted by Section 1.\"}]","ANTITRUST LAW - Unit 6: Conspiracy and Dispositive Motions - Procedure Version - Spring 2022 | PDF",1791250109,202]