Blade

The original complaint in this matter was filed on May 2,1952. It was in three causes of action: the first for alleged liability under the Sherman Act, 15 U.S. C.A. §§ 1-7, 15 note; the second for alleged liability under the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 12 et seq., and the third a count for damages for fraud.

Upon motions to dismiss, an order was made granting the motion to dismiss without leave to amend as to the first and second causes of action and granting the motion to dismiss as to the third cause of action with leave to amend. See Sears, Roebuck v. Blade, D.C., 110 F. Supp. 96 . After the filing of that memorandum, in February 1953, appeal was taken by the plaintiffs but later abandoned, and on August 21, 1953, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint for dam-" ages for fraud in one cause of action.-

The matter is before the court on a' motion for summary -judgment by defendant Blade, and on motions of the' other defendants to dismiss or in the al-. ternative for summary judgment.

By its amended complaint the plaintiff seeks to recover damages for fraud from Blade (its former employee for many years), Metropolitan Engravers, Ltd., a corporation, Metropolitan Mat Service,…