Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1960678
 


 



New Lessons for Pleading the FTAIA


Max Huffman


Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

November 16, 2011

Competition Policy International Antitrust Chronicle, p. 1, November 2011

Abstract:     
The Seventh Circuit recently concluded that allegations of price-fixing in foreign commerce, with effects on domestic U.S. commerce due to the integrated worldwide market for the agricultural fertilizer component potash, were insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss under the Supreme Court's decisions in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal. The complaint's failing was the lack of plausible allegations of a direct effect of overseas price-fixing on domestic or import markets.

Minn-Chem v. Agrium illustrates a squaring of the burdens facing private antitrust plaintiffs seeking extraterritorial application of the law. The substantive standard under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act was difficult to meet prior to Twombly and Iqbal. Combining it with a pleading standard created to protect against false positive errors from private antitrust enforcement substantially increases the challenge to private plaintiffs.

The case is the latest in a long line of opinions reflecting courts’ suspicions of private plaintiff efforts to expand the scope of private antitrust enforcement, either by drawing links between harm in the United States and a plaintiff's harm overseas (as in Empagran II), or by drawing links between conduct occurring overseas and a harm felt in the United States.

Minn-Chem v. Agrium is a window into the application of Twombly and Iqbal to the FTAIA inquiry. Careful analysis suggests the court may have been overly skeptical in its review of the complaint for two reasons: Plaintiffs' allegations did raise the possibility of a direct effect, and the likelihood of a false positive error from permitting discovery on the crux question of the world-wide interconnectedness of the potash market was low, suggesting plaintiffs deserved leeway in stating those allegations.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 8

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: November 17, 2011  

Suggested Citation

Huffman, Max, New Lessons for Pleading the FTAIA (November 16, 2011). Competition Policy International Antitrust Chronicle, p. 1, November 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1960678

Contact Information

Max Huffman (Contact Author)
Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law ( email )
530 West New York Street
Indianapolis, IN 46202
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 404
Downloads: 62
Download Rank: 208,629

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.516 seconds