In Re Independent Service Organizations Antitrust Litigation

203 F.3d 1322 (2000)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D manufactures, sells, and services high-volume copiers. D has a policy of not selling parts unique to its series 10 copiers to independent service organizations (ISOs), including Ps unless they were also end-users of the copiers. D expanded this to include all new products as well as existing series 9 copiers. D cut off P's direct purchase of restricted parts. D also confirmed that the parts ordered were actually for their end-user use. P used parts cannibalized from used Xerox equipment, parts obtained from other ISOs, and parts purchased through a limited number of its customers. D also obtained parts from a majority-owned European affiliate of Xerox; that was eventually discovered and stopped. In 1994, D settled an antitrust lawsuit with a class of ISOs. P opted out of that settlement and filed this suit alleging that D violated the Sherman Act by setting the prices on its patented parts much higher for ISOs than for end-users to force ISOs to raise their prices. D counterclaimed for patent and copyright infringement and injury solely caused by D's lawful refusal to sell or license patented parts and copyrighted software. The court granted summary judgment to D holding that the unilateral refusal to sell or license its patented invention or copyrighted expression is not unlawful exclusionary conduct under the antitrust laws, even if the refusal to deal impacts competition in more than one market. P appealed.