Legal Opinion

In re Rubber Chemicals Antitrust Litigation

District Court, N.D. California

Decided October 6, 2005No. C 04-1648 MJJPublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

JENKINS, District Judge.

INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Rule 23 motion for class certification in this multi-district litigation arising from an alleged conspiracy by Defendants to fix the prices of the chemicals used in the manufacture of tires and other rubber products. Plaintiffs seek certification of the following class:

All persons (excluding government entities, defendants, and the present or former parents, predecessors, subsidiaries and affiliates of the foregoing) which purchased rubber chemicals in the United States…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. In Re Northern District of California, Dalkon Shield Iud Products Liability Litigation.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  2. Windham v. American Brands, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
  3. In re Potash Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1995
  4. In Re Catfish Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · 1993
  5. In re Cardizem CD Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2001

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Fisher v. Ciba Specialty Chemicals Corp.District Court, S.D. Alabama · 2006
  2. Lorix v. Crompton Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  3. Celano v. Marriott International, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2007
  4. In re Graphics Processing Units Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2008
  5. In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2010

22 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