United States Sixth Circuit

In an antitrust suit brought against 3M by the only other supplier in the market for do-it-yourself automotive sandpaper, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed as: 1) 3M did not engage in below-cost or predatory pricing; 2) five of the six large retailers controlling 80% of the market demanded exclusivity as a precondition for doing business; 3) the allegations showed no more than that 3M competed with its rival on the same essential terms that plaintiff and the large retailers had already established for this market; and 4) the antitrust laws in the end protect competition, not competitors.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/17/2007
• Published 10/17/2007

Judges

• Before:  BOGGS, Chief Judge;  MARTIN, SILER, BATCHELDER, DAUGHTREY, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, GIBBONS, ROGERS, SUTTON, COOK, McKEAGUE, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Dennis E. Murray, Jr., Murray & Murray Co., L.P.A., Sandusky, Ohio, for Appellant.  Dean Ringel, Cahill, Gordon & Reindel, New York, New York, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Dennis E. Murray, Jr., Murray & Murray Co., L.P.A., Sandusky, Ohio, for Appellant.  Dean Ringel, Cahill, Gordon & Reindel, New York, New York, James P. Murphy, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Washington, D.C., J. Philip Calabrese, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.