In Re Graphics Processing Units Antitrust Litigation
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 5
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO DISMISS
WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
In this multi-district antitrust proceeding, all defendants have moved to dismiss the direct purchasers’ complaint as well as the indirect purchasers’ complaint. One of the prominent issues presented is the proper application of the recent decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, — U.S. —, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007). The motions are Granted in Part and Denied in Part for the reasons stated below.
STATEMENT
Taking all well-pled facts as true, the complaints…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- Park Irmat Drug Corp. v. Express Scripts Holding Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2018
- In Re Chocolate Confectionary Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
- In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litig.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2017
- In Re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2008
- In Re Packaged Ice Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2011
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.