Viamedia Opposes Comcast Motion to Dismiss Antitrust Suit
Comcast is being overly formal when it says Viamedia was required "to follow ritualistic pleading rules" to state its Sherman Act Section 2 claim, including using the word "tying" in its complaint, Viamedia said in a supplemental reply (in Pacer)…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
in opposition to Comcast's motion to dismiss the antitrust complaint against it (see 1607250037). Viamedia said its complaint shows "the substance of anticompetitive tying and exclusive dealing," and competition in the spot advertising market is gone because of Comcast monopoly control over interconnects. Viamedia said Comcast is misreading its claims when the cable company likens them to monopoly theories rejected in the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' 2006 Schor v. Abbott Laboratories decision, saying the type of tying and exclusive dealing Comcast is engaged in was recognized in Schor as violating the Sherman Act. U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve of Chicago ordered Viamedia earlier this month to file the supplemental reply to address specifically the Comcast arguments referencing Schor and other monopoly cases.