Welcome to the first Commercial Roundup in 2024–and Happy New Year.
- Promise to charge “competitive” price for power didn’t require price lower than default utility charged.
- Hot off the Antitrust Division and FTC presses.
- Contract naming Chinese parent firm as consignee of cattle feed did not make parent a party to contract its subsidiary signed and did not subject it to personal jurisdiction on breach of contract claim.
- Failure of timeshare seller to pre-clear arbitration clauses with AAA entitled buyers to sue it in court.
- Claim construction by magistrate judge and special master doesn’t sway Federal Circuit panel.
- Limitations barred all claims arising from purchase of fake Rothko painting except possibly the one for fraud.
- FTC defeats constitutional challenges to in-house ALJ system and attacks on “potential competition” theory for blocking vertical merger.
- Chancery Court could not take judicial notice of another court’s fact findings.
- Mushroom coop’s scheme to raise grower prices partly depended on vertical restraints, making “quick look” presumption that scheme had anticompetitive effects not available.
- “Barcode” in patent on coffee capsules referred to length and width of bars, not to what coffee maker read the bars to represent.
- A big way big pharma shapes your doctor’s thoughts.
- This just in.
- Statements about studies of tobacco-heating products didn’t express facts, couldn’t support securities fraud claim.
- Does copyright law protect this thorough and elegant statement of claims against OpenAI?
- Statute that allows surcharge on “invoices”, “billings”, and “credit payments” for “black car service” applies to tips.
- Forum-choice clause in patent license that allowed parties to challenge certain patents during license’s term did not apply to IPRs
- Expert could not use lay witness’s non-expert testimony about 30 percent increase in repair costs as basis for raising his opinion on