Pacific Bell v. linkLine: Supreme Court Puts the Squeeze on Price Squeezes

Pacific Bell v. linkLine: Supreme Court Puts the Squeeze on Price Squeezes

Client News

Related Solutions

We offer clients exceptional insight in dealing with competition agencies in the United States, Europe and around the world.
Handling complex antitrust and competition litigation across the US, UK and Europe, representing both plaintiffs and defendants in various high-stakes cases.
Antitrust and Competition
A global team handling highly complex and sensitive matters in all aspects of litigation.
On February 25, 2009, the Supreme Court, in Pacific Bell Tel. Co. v. linkLine Commc'ns, Inc., No. 07-512,—S. Ct.—(2009) (slip op.), available here, ended the era of the "price squeeze" as a stand-alone basis for liability under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. In a classic price squeeze, a vertically-integrated supplier with monopoly power in the upstream (wholesale) market raises wholesale prices to a competitor in the downstream (retail) market while it lowers its own retail prices. For more on the Supreme Court's ruling on the Supreme Court, in Pacific Bell Tel. Co. v. linkLine Commc'ns, Inc., see our recent Email Alert.

Notice

Unless you are an existing client, before communicating with WilmerHale by e-mail (or otherwise), please read the Disclaimer referenced by this link.(The Disclaimer is also accessible from the opening of this website). As noted therein, until you have received from us a written statement that we represent you in a particular manner (an "engagement letter") you should not send to us any confidential information about any such matter. After we have undertaken representation of you concerning a matter, you will be our client, and we may thereafter exchange confidential information freely.

Thank you for your interest in WilmerHale.

I Accept Cancel