The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvement Act (FTAIA) creates an important statutory standing requirement for plaintiffs who seek to recover for antitrust injuries in the United States, prohibiting the use of U.S. courts to recover antitrust injuries when the injuries were suffered outside of the U.S. However, there are two exceptions: the Import Commerce exception, when the anticompetitive conduct impacts goods imported into the U.S., and the Domestic Effects exception, when the antitrust injuries arose from extraterritorial conduct that has a direct effect on U.S. commerce.
In an article published as a resource by the American Bar Association’s Antitrust Law Section, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Associate Samuel M. Smith discusses a recent Ninth Circuit decision that provided important guidance on when the Domestic Effects exception could apply. The decision in Seagate Technology v. NHK Spring Co. opened up a new path to recovering damages, holding that a U.S. business that did not directly purchase a price-fixed foreign product can recover damages caused to their foreign subsidiaries who directly purchased the product if the U.S. entity controlled pricing and purchasing on behalf of their foreign subsidiaries from within the U.S.
Smith handles commercial litigation, employment law, and healthcare matters. Prior to joining GRSM, he worked as a law clerk at a plaintiff-side firm, assisting with research, drafting, and editing in antitrust and trademark infringement cases. Smith’s degree in economics and experience developing and investigating potential antitrust lawsuits on the plaintiff side allow him to comprehensively evaluate and understand the different theories of economic damages in business and unfair competition disputes.
Read the full article on the ABA’s website. Subscription may be required.