Brennan

Brennan v. Concord EFS, Inc.

Good Law
369 F. Supp. 2d 1127·2005 WL 1081341·2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9243
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 4, 2005C042676VRWCalifornia5,929 words

Opinion

Opinion

Walker, J.

ORDER

In this putative class action, -plaintiffs assert that defendants — banks and other entities involved in the processing of withdrawals from automated teller machines (ATMs) in the “Star” ATM network (“Star”) — have engaged in horizontal price fixing declared illegal by section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 USC § 1 . Plaintiffs argue that defendants’ conduct is condemned per se; they disclaim any intention of proceeding on a rule of reason theory. Several defendants move to dismiss the complaint (or for judgment on the pleadings) on the ground that Star is a procompetitive cooperative joint venture subject only to rule of reason analysis. Doc ## 26, 29, 42. Other defendants move to dismiss on the ground that the complaint does not sufficiently allege their involvement in setting the terms of Star’s operations. Doc ## 17, 33.

I

“On a motion to dismiss, all well-pleaded allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in a light most favorable to the non-moving party.” Wyler Summit Partnership v. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir.1998) (citing Parks School of Business, Inc. v. Symington, 51 F.3d 1480, 1484 (9th Cir.1995)).…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.