Don Williams, AKA Donald Williams v. I.B. Fischer Nevada I.B. Fischer Properties, Inc. Ira Fischbein Foodmaker, Inc.

Williams appeals from the district court’s summary judgment for I.B. Fischer Nevada, I.B. Fischer Properties, Inc., and Ira Fisch- bein (together Fischer) and Foodmaker, Inc. (Foodmaker). Williams argues that the court erred in rejecting his antitrust claims against Fischer and Foodmaker on the ground that they constitute a common enterprise, incapable of conspiring to restrain trade. The district court exercised jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 15 (a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I

The facts of this case are described in the district court’s published order, Williams v. I.B. Fischer Nevada, 794 F.Supp. 1026, 1029 (D.Nev.1992) (Fischer Nevada). We briefly summarize them here. Foodmaker is the franchisor of Jack-in-the-Box restaurants, and Fischer is a franchisee. Foodmaker requires all of its franchisees to consent to a “no-switching” agreement, whereby the franchisees agree not to offer employment to the manager of another Jack-in-the-Box within six months of that manager’s termination from employment, unless that manager obtains a release from the franchisee of the Jack-in-the-Box he or she is…