Dan Oliver v. Sd-3c LLC

Good Law
751 F.3d 1081·2014 WL 1910788·110 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1954·2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 8972
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 14, 201412-16421California2,537 words

Opinion

Opinion

Paez, J.

In this antitrust suit, Plaintiffs, purchasers of SD digital memory cards, allege that Defendants Panasonic Corporation, Toshiba Corporation, SanDisk Corporation, and SD -3 C, LLC (collectively “Defendants”) violated federal and state antitrust laws by conspiring to fix the price for SD cards and engaging in improper practices with respect to the licensing of Defendants’ patents to other manufacturers of SD cards. The district court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims as time-barred. Reviewing de novo, we reverse. Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasadena, 592 F.3d 954, 960 (9th Cir.2010).

Recently, in a related action, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Panasonic Corp., 12-15185, 747 F.3d 1199 , 2014 WL 1328318 (9th Cir. Apr. 4, 2014), we held that the district court erred in concluding that the Clayton Act’s four-year statute of limitations barred Samsung Electronics Company’s antitrust claims for damages and injunctive relief against Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America, and SD-3C. In this case, unlike the plaintiff in Samsung, Plaintiffs only seek injunctive relief under section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 26 . Because Plaintiffs seek…

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.