United States Ninth Circuit

In an action brought by lessors of copier equipment against IKON alleging it engaged in an ongoing scheme to defraud its customers via certain contractual amendments, dismissal of plaintiffs' complaint for failure to state viable Sherman Act antitrust, Lanham Act, and RICO claims against IKON is reversed where: 1) plaintiffs' antitrust claims alleged a legally cognizable "relevant market"; 2) the court rejects defendant's alternate grounds for affirmance on those claims; and 3) plaintiffs sufficiently alleged false or misleading statements of fact to support a Lanham Act claim; 4) the lower court erred in finding plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue a RICO claim; and 5) dismissal of a declaratory complaint without leave to amend was an abuse of discretion.

Appellate Information

• Argued 04/19/2007
• Decided 01/23/2008
• Published 01/23/2008

Judges

• THOMAS, Circuit Judge:, Before:  ANDREW J. KLEINFELD and SIDNEY R. THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and TIMOTHY M. BURGESS, District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Maxwell M. Blecher, James Robert Noblin, Matthew E. Hess, Blecher & Collins, Los Angeles, CA;  and James A. Hennefer, Hennefer & Wood, San Francisco, CA, for the plaintiffs-appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Brad D. Brian and Joseph D. Lee, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Los Angeles, CA;  for defendant-appellee, General Electric Corporation., Alfred C. Pfeiffer, Jr., Holly A. House, Tyler B. Theis, Brian C. Rocca, Rachel Sommovilla, Bingham McCutchen LLP, San Francisco, CA, for defendant-appellee, IKON Office Solutions, Inc.