United States v. Lsl Biotechnologies Seminis Vegetable Seeds, Inc. Lsl Plantscience Lcc
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge TALLMAN; Dissent by Judge ALDISERT.
TALLMAN, Circuit Judge:
We must decide whether the district court erred by determining that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this antitrust action. The United States alleged that an agreement between the defendants (collectively, “LSL”) and an Israeli company, Hazera Quality Seeds, Inc., violates the Sherman Act. Because the challenged agreement does not have a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect on United States commerce, we affirm the district court’s dismissal.
I
This dispute grows out of a joint business venture…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Republic of Argentina v. Weltover, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Caribbean Broadcasting System, Ltd. v. Cable & Wireless PLCCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- United States v. Frank Fiorillo, Jr., and Art KruegerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Carrier Corporation v. Outokumpu OyjCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Lotes Co. v. Hon Hai Precision Industry Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
- Minn-Chem, Incorpora v. Agrium IncoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- In Re Dynamic Random Access Memory (Dram)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Animal Science Products, Inc. v. China National Metals & Minerals Import & Export Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2008
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.