Legal Opinion

In Re Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 26, 2011No. 2:08-cv-02002PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

GENE E.K. PRATTER, District Judge.

J. Introduction

This multidistrict litigation concerns an alleged conspiracy by egg producers and trade groups to restrict the domestic supply of eggs in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. A half dozen motions to dismiss await resolution. 1 The movants seek to dismiss the claimed antitrust violation asserted against them individually in the direct purchaser plaintiffs’ Second Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (hereinafter, the “SAC”) for not meeting the grade. They argue that the SAC is like a curate’s egg: although the pleading…

2Cases cited65 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. In re Niaspan Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
  4. Wright v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. In re Generic Pharm. Pricing Antitrust Litig.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API