Rotec Industries, Inc. v. Mitsubishi Corp.

This controversy arises out of the construction of a massive dam on the Yangtze River by the government of the People’s Republic of China. The parties competed for contracts to sell construction equipment to the Chinese government. Rotee Industries, Inc., appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to defendants on Rotec’s claim of violation of section 2(c) of the Robinson-Patman Act and on its Oregon state law claim of intentional interference with economic advantage. Rotee argues that the district court erred by holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the Robinson-Pat-man claim. Rotee also assigns error to the district court’s ruling that Rotee did not introduce sufficient evidence to create an issue of fact regarding the causation element of Rotec’s intentional interference claim.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Finding no error in the district court’s grant of summary judgment, we AFFIRM.

Facts

Almost two millennia after Chinese emperors began construction on what would one day be the Great Wall, China’s government began construction on another ambitious public works project. Upon completion, the Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze…