Legal Opinion
Oxbow Carbon & Minerals LLC v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided February 26, 2013No. Civil Action No. 2011-1049PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court has carefully considered the arguments made by the parties in their papers and the oral arguments presented by counsel in court on October 26, 2012. 1 The Court concludes that plaintiffs have failed to allege adequate facts to state claims under Section 1 and Section 2 of the Sherman Act, although it is plausible that plaintiffs could amend their complaint to sufficiently allege a claim under the Act. Accordingly,…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- In re Zinc Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- Oxbow Carbon & Minerals LLC v. Union Pacific Railroad CompanyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Suture Express, Inc. v. Cardinal Health 200, LLCDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2013
- In Re: Domestic Airline Travel Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Sky Angel U.S., LLC v. National Cable Satellite CorporationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.