Legal Opinion
In re Blood Reagents Antitrust Litigation
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 19, 2017No. MDL NO. 2081; MASTER FILE NO. 09-MD-2081PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*754MEMORANDUM
DuBois, District Judge
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION... 754
II. BACKGROUND... 754
A. Factual Background... 755
B. Creation of a Duopoly.. .756
C. 2001 Price Increase... 756
1. Shift to Blood Bank Leadership Program ...757
2. Aleged Price-Fixing Conspiracy. . .757
D. 2005 Price Increases... 759
1. Price Increases... 759
2. 2004 GPO Contract Cancellations ...762
E. 2008 Price Increase... 762
F. Evidentiary Issues... 764
1. Parties’ Statements... 764
2. Co-Conspirator Statements... 764
III. Procedural History.. .764
IV. Applicable Law.. .766
A. The Matsushita Standard... 766
B. Analyzing Evidence at…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- First Nat. Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Service Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re Generic Pharm. Pricing Antitrust Litig.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
- IN RE: FRAGRANCE INDIRECT PURCHASER ANTITRUST LITIGATIONDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2025
- OUR OWN CANDLE COMPANY, INC. v. GIVAUDAN S.A.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2025