II v. Microsoft Corporation’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “equitable balancing of a plaintiff's delay with prejudice to a defendant”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Steves & Sons, Inc. v. Jeld-Wen, Inc. · Steves & Sons, Inc. v. Jeld-Wen, Inc.

2. “(1) the causal connection between an antitrust violation and harm to the plaintiffs, and whether that harm was intended, (2) whether the harm "was of a type that Congress sought to redress in providing a private remedy for violations of the antitrust laws,” (3) the directness of the alleged injury, (4) "the existence of more direct victims” of the alleged antitrust injury; and (5) "problems of identifying damages and apportioning them” among those directly and indirectly harmed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 540 F. Supp. 2d 869 - White Mule Co. v. ATC LEASING CO. LLC

3. “[T]he question of which persons have been injured by an illegal overcharge for purposes of § 4 is analytically distinct from the question of which persons have sustained injuries too remote to give them standing to sue for damages under § 4.”) (emphasis add- ■ ed). . Kloth v. Microsoft Corp., 444 F.3d 312, 324 (4th Cir.2006) (dismissing plaintiffs claims where “it is merely coincidental that they purchased Microsoft products at all” and”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Laumann v. National Hockey League