Comcast, Cable Installers at Odds in Antitrust Complaint Before 3rd Circuit
Two regional cable installation firms with which Comcast didn't contract make "only conclusory and irrelevant assertions and invective" in their claims it opted not to use them because of their white ownership and because Comcast colluded with two other firms…
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.
that did make the cut, the cable operator said in a docket 18-2316 brief (in Pacer) last week with 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. It said plaintiffs Cable Line and McLaughlin Communications don't plausibly allege anticompetitive agreement among the defendants, and the argument Comcast ceased doing business with them because of the owners' race "is devoid of substance." Comcast and the defendant-appellee installation companies "clearly had an agreement," since Comcast had no legitimate business purpose to shut out other installation companies, destroying competition, the plaintiff-appellants said in their brief (in Pacer) in September. They said they were never given an opportunity for discovery.