In Re Atm Fee Antitrust Litigation

Good Law
768 F. Supp. 2d 984·2009 WL 8029080·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83199
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 4, 2009C 04-02676 CRBCalifornia9,571 words

Opinion

Opinion

Breyer, J.

ORDER

With this antitrust action, filed over five years ago, Plaintiffs challenge the legitima cy of the fixed interchange fees in the Star ATM network. This case has slowly wound its way through several Judges and multiple rounds of dispositive motions. In the Court’s most recent order addressing Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, the Court held that the per se rule is inapplicable to Plaintiffs’ claim. Plaintiffs then filed their Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) which purports to allege an antitrust violation that may be sustained under the rule of reason analysis.

Before the Court are four motions to dismiss through which Defendants challenge the sufficiency of Plaintiffs’ pleading. Having held oral argument on August 28, 2009 and carefully considering the submissions of the parties, the Court hereby GRANTS dismissal with leave to amend because Plaintiffs have failed to allege a legally adequate “relevant market.” The Court also GRANTS dismissal of Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”) because claims against BANA are barred by the statute of limitations. Further, the Court GRANTS with prejudice dismissal of the bank holding companies for failure to state a…

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.