Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 MAY 2018

The Future Of Antitrust Claims At The ITC

Ropes & Gray LLP
Ropes & Gray LLP
Contributor
Ropes & Gray LLP

Ropes & Gray LLP

Ropes & Gray is one of the world’s most respected law firms, with offices in key business and...

View firm profile
Explore more from Ropes & Gray LLP

In March, the U.S. International Trade Commission issued its long-awaited opinion in Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products, nearly a full year after the ITC held a rare full-day oral hearing...

United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law

In March, the U.S. International Trade Commission issued its long-awaited opinion in Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products, nearly a full year after the ITC held a rare full-day oral hearing before the full commission. The ITC dismissed the antitrust-based Section 337 complaint brought by complainant U.S. Steel, holding that U.S. Steel failed to plead the requisite "antitrust injury" to maintain its action before the ITC. While one commissioner (Commissioner Meredith M. Broadbent) dissented from the ITC's decision, the commission's dismissal of U.S. Steel's complaint caused some to question whether there remained a viable path for antitrust-based claims at the ITC. But the ITC's initiation of an antitrust-based Section 337 investigation just days later in Certain Programmable Logic Controllers shows that the door for antitrust claims at the ITC has not closed. Those interested in bringing future antitrust-related claims at the commission should use the guidance

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from