Lufthansa Suit Tossed Without Leave to Replead

Download IconDownload Print IconPrint

Lufthansa Suit Tossed Without Leave to Replead

Client News

Related Solutions

With offices in the United States, Europe and China, WilmerHale has one of the world’s premier aviation practices.
We offer clients exceptional insight in dealing with competition agencies in the United States, Europe and around the world.
“The firm is at its best during a fight—whether that’s against an enforcer, or in court against a private litigant.” — Global Competition Review
A global team handling highly complex and sensitive matters in all aspects of litigation.
Drawing on years of experience in the public and private sectors, our lawyers handle a range of litigation involving the federal government, state and foreign governments, and complex regulatory regimes.

WilmerHale represented Deutsche Lufthansa AG (“Lufthansa”) in the antitrust complaint that Lufthansa and other Defendant air carriers conspired to fix prices and surcharges on passenger flights between the United States and various transatlantic destinations, including Germany. On April 5, 2010, Judge Kiyo Matsumoto of the Eastern District of New York issued a memorandum and order dismissing a Sherman Act Section 1 price-fixing claim against Lufthansa.

Plaintiffs alleged that the airlines agreed to implement an International Air Transport Association ("IATA") resolution regarding the imposition of surcharges on passenger tickets without having received DOT approval of that resolution. To support their claim, Plaintiffs relied on allegations of parallel conduct among the airlines, as well as DOJ investigations in related air transportation markets.

The WilmerHale team and Lufthansa filed a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the lawsuit for failure to state a claim, arguing that Plaintiffs failed to provide enough factual support to make their conspiracy claims “plausible” under the Supreme Court’s Twombly decision. In granting the motion, Judge Matsumoto held that Plaintiffs’ conclusory allegations of agreement at immunized IATA meetings lacked sufficient factual support to survive a motion to dismiss. She also concluded that Plaintiffs’ bald allegations regarding Defendants’ opportunities to conspire and parallel conduct failed to give rise to a plausible inference of illegal agreement. Finally, the court rejected Plaintiffs’ allegations regarding cartel behavior related to different products and different geographic markets. In a total victory for Lufthansa, the court dismissed the case without leave to replead.

The WilmerHale team was led by partners David Ogden and Eric Mahr; Christopher Babbitt, Rachel Stutz and Caroline Nguyen assisted with the briefing; David Heffernan and Ed Cox provided aviation counsel.

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