Defendants Summary Judgment Motion In In Re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litigation May Illuminate Policy Justifications Behind Ownership Or Control Exception

Earlier this month, defendants in the In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litigation moved to challenge the standing of major retailers to pursue damages claims under the Supreme Court's 1977 Illinois Brick decision.  LG Electronics, Samsung, Panasonic, and other manufacturers asked the United States District Court for  the Northern District of California to deny standing to Best Buy, K-Mart, Costco, and other so-called "Direct Action Plaintiffs" who actually purchased cathode ray tube (CRT) Finished Products and not CRT tubes themselves, arguing that the purchase of CRT Finished Products, as opposed to CRT tubes, renders the "Direct Action Plaintiffs"—despite their name—indirect purchasers who have no antitrust standing to recover damages.  Panasonic's motion in particular presents an issue as to whether the "ownership or control" exception to the rule barring indirect purchasers from recovering damages is applicable to some of the purchases made by the Direct Action