Legal Opinion
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Panasonic Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 4, 2014No. 12-15185PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GOULD, Circuit Judge:
We must determine the scope of the continuing violation exception to the four-year statute of limitations on private actions to enforce the antitrust laws. 15 U.S.C. § 15b. Plaintiff-Appellant Samsung Electronics Company (“Samsung”) appeals the district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) of its claim against Defendants-Appellees Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America, and SD-3C, LLC (“SD Defendants”). We review de novó a district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim. Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at PasadenaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2013
- International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation v. General Telephone & Electronics Corporation and Hawaiian Telephone CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- C. O. Hanson v. Shell Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- In re Keurig Green Mountain Single-Serve Coffee Antitrust Litig.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 2019
- Dan Oliver v. Sd-3c LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Garrison v. Oracle Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2016
- Ryan v. Microsoft Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- In re Capacitors Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.