[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;)

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;)
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:49:23 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Terekhov <> writes:

> Let's try once again, dak.
> The judge admits that Wallace alleges predatory pricing and yet 
> dismisses "based on failure to allege an anticompetitive effect". 
> Now, under 12(b)(6) standard, "the court accepts the allegations 
> in the complaint as true, and it draws all reasonable inferences 
> in favor of the plaintiff." 

But there is no substance to be found to support an allegation.  For
example, I can allege a person to be a rapist, but if there is no
purported victim, I can't make a case from that.

Just waving some term around does not mean that there is a legal base
for waving the term around.

> Inference of requisite anticompetitive effect from the allegations
> in the complaint is no rocket science -- "predatory pricing has the
> requisite anticompetitive effect" (ARCO).
> Where am I wrong, dak?

Where is the anticompetitive effect?

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]