Yesterday — just hours after Judge Rakoff ordered broad discovery from Uber and its in-house counsel regarding potentially improper investigative techniques —  Uber’s CEO moved to compel arbitration in the antitrust class action brought by Uber riders (see previous coverage here).  The motion argues that the CEO, as an employee of Uber, is entitled to assert Uber’s arbitration clause in the terms and conditions that each rider agreed to.  The motion also argues that the arbitrator, and not Judge Rakoff, should decide the question of arbitrability in the first instance.

Continue Reading On Heels of Inquiry Into Potential Litigation Misconduct, Uber CEO Moves to Have Case Heard in Arbitration

A memorandum order released today reveals that, in an antitrust case against Uber’s CEO (covered here), Judge Rakoff became concerned over improper investigative techniques that Uber (or its agents) employed.  Specifically, Uber hired an firm called Ergo to investigate the plaintiff and plaintiff’s counsel, and, in doing so, Ergo’s investigator allegedly made various misrepresentations to gain information, such as claiming that he was a reporter writing a profile of plaintiff’s counsel.

At a hearing (the transcript of which remains nonpublic), Judge Rakoff ordered broad discovery from Uber — including from an Uber in-house attorney — and from Ergo concerning the investigation.  In the order released today, Judge Rakoff denied Uber’s motion to reconsider a portion of his ruling calling for in camera review of privileged material as possibly falling within the “crime-fraud” exception to the privilege:
Continue Reading Judge Rakoff Authorizes Discovery from Uber Counsel to Probe Potentially Improper Investigation of Adversary and Opposing Counsel

In an opinion Monday, the Second Circuit reversed Judge Buchwald’s dismissal of antitrust claims based on the alleged manipulation of LIBOR (covered here).  Judge Buchwald ruled that the process of establishing LIBOR was a “cooperative” endeavor that, even if manipulated, would not cause harm to competition for purposes of the antitrust laws.  The Second

In an opinion yesterday, Judge Rakoff denied a motion to dismiss a class action against Uber CEO Travis Kalanick alleging that he and Uber drivers had entered into an illegal conspiracy to fix Uber prices at those set by Uber’s algorithm. According to the complaint, this arrangement guarantees that the drivers will not be competing

Shortly before a nine-day bench trial was scheduled to start this morning, Major League Baseball settled an antitrust suit alleging it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball broadcast out-of-market games only as part of a allegedly overpriced all-or-nothing packages.  As part of the settlement, MLB will offer reduced price packages for fans to stream out-of-market

In an opinion today, Judge Forrest dismissed (with a limited right to replead) claims that various banks and their affiliates conspired to monopolize and inflate prices in the market for zinc stored in warehouses licensed by the London Metal Exchange.  The case is similar to the aluminum antitrust cases before Judge Forrest (covered here).  She found (among other things) that the complaint alleged, at most, parallel conduct.
Continue Reading Judge Forrest Dismisses Zinc Antitrust Case; Chides Lawyers for “Group Pleading”

The plaintiffs and Major League Baseball yesterday exchanged briefs in anticipation of a January 18 trial before Judge Scheindlin in a case alleging it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball to divide the market for broadcasting games into various territories exclusive to the local teams, while allowing the broadcast of out-of-market games only as part of a allegedly overpriced all-or-nothing packages.  (A companion case relating to National Hockey League games was recently settled.)
Continue Reading Parties File Pretrial Briefs in Antitrust Challenge to Baseball’s “Territorial” Broadcast Structure

Last week, Judge Schofield granted U.S. Airways’ motion to reinstate their claim for $70 million in damages ($210 million when trebled under antitrust laws) as part of a third amended complaint in an antitrust action over online booking fees.  Sabre, a global distribution system operator used by travel agents to book flights on multiple airlines, argued that U.S. Airways had already waived the claims in its second amended complaint in an attempt to secure a bench trial and that reinstatement was improper and would prejudice Sabre.  Judge Schofield rejected these arguments, noting that U.S. Airways’ revocation of its waiver did not change the claims at issue (only the damages) and thus amendment was still proper under Rules 15 and 16.

Continue Reading Judge Schofield Allows U.S. Airways to Restore Damages Claim in Antitrust Case Despite Previous Waiver

Last week, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred 25 actions pending in three districts to Judge Gardephe as part of a MDL concerning Treasury securities.  According to the Order, the actions all allege that “over 20 defendant banks conspired to manipulate Treasury securities auctions overseen by Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as well