Third Circuit finds no Robinson-Patman violation for Michael Foods and Sodexo | Practical Law

Third Circuit finds no Robinson-Patman violation for Michael Foods and Sodexo | Practical Law

On 7 January 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued its decision in Feesers, Inc. v. Michael Foods, Inc. and Sodexho, Inc., finding that Feesers, a food distributor, could not satisfy the competitive injury requirement for price discrimination under section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act. The Third Circuit vacated the district court's judgment that Feesers had successfully proved unlawful price discrimination under section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act.

Third Circuit finds no Robinson-Patman violation for Michael Foods and Sodexo

Practical Law UK Legal Update 0-501-3479 (Approx. 3 pages)

Third Circuit finds no Robinson-Patman violation for Michael Foods and Sodexo

by Practical Law
Law stated as at 07 Jan 2010 • USA (National/Federal)
On 7 January 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued its decision in Feesers, Inc. v. Michael Foods, Inc. and Sodexho, Inc., finding that Feesers, a food distributor, could not satisfy the competitive injury requirement for price discrimination under section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act. The Third Circuit vacated the district court's judgment that Feesers had successfully proved unlawful price discrimination under section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act.