Legal Opinion
Andrea Resnick v. Netflix, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 27, 2015No. 11-18034, 12-16160, 12-16183PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
THOMAS, Chief Judge:
These consolidated antitrust actions arise out of an agreement (“Promotion Agreement”) between Netflix and Wal-mart 1 whereby Walmart transferred its online DVD-rental subscribers to Netflix, and Netflix agreed to promote Walmart’s DVD sales business. The plaintiffs, individuals representing a class of Netflix subscribers (“Subscribers”), contend that this arrangement violated §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by illegally allocating and monopolizing the online DVD-rental market. The Subscribers’ theory of injury is that they paid supracompetitive prices for one of…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Crawford Fitting Co. v. J. T. Gibbons, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- FMC Corp. v. HollidaySupreme Court of the United States · 1990
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Kelly v. Serco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Huawei Techs., Co. v. Samsung Elecs. Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
- Optronic Technologies, Inc. v. Ningbo Sunny Electronic Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- United Food & Commercial Workers Local 1776 & Participating Emp'rs Health & Welfare Fund v. Teikoku Pharma United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2017
- Key v. Qualcomm IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2025
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.