United States Third Circuit

Vertical restraints are generally not per se violations of the Sherman Act, even where a distributor and manufacturer also compete at the distribution level, i.e., have some form of horizontal relationship. In an appeal arising from a suit for breach of contract brought by AT&T against a wholesaler, marketer, and designer of prepaid telephone cards, rulings in favor of AT&T on its contract claim and against defendant on counterclaims are affirmed where: 1) defendant failed to state a claim pursuant to the Sherman Act; 2) its federal common law claims were largely barred by the filed rate doctrine, and a claim of breach of tariff failed since AT&T did not need to list a certain carrier as an "other participating carrier"; 3) defendant's state law claims were barred by the filed rate doctrine; and 4) as defendant's counterclaims and defenses failed, summary judgment for AT&T on its breach of tariff claim was proper.

Appellate Information

• Argued 03/07/2006
• Decided 12/01/2006
• Published 12/01/2006

Judges

• Before: GREENBERG and ROTH , Circuit Judges, BUCKWALTER , District Court Judge.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Joseph M. Alioto, Esquire (Argued), Alioto Law Firm, San Francisco, CA, Gil D. Messina, Esquire, Cassidy, Messina, & Laffey, Holmdel, NJ, Russell F. Brasso, Esquire, Foreman & Brasso, San Francisco, CA, for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Joseph R. Guerra, Esquire (Argued), Sidley Austin, Washington, DC, Richard H. Brown, III, Esquire, Pitney Hardin, Morristown, NJ, for Appellee.