Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 643 F. Supp. 2d 1133 - In Re Flash Memory Antitrust Litigation

643 F. Supp. 2d 1133 - In Re Flash Memory Antitrust Litigation’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
March 2022
most recently cited

6 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2022 · most notably 779 F. Supp. 2d 642 - In Re Packaged Ice Antitrust Litigation (2011), 78 F. Supp. 3d 1051 - In re Carrier IQ, Inc. (2015)

6 district · 1 state decisions

340200920102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act)

Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Erickson v. Pardus · Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of Carpenters · Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois · United States v. United States Gypsum Co.

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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “an act or practice in connection with the sale ... of any goods or services ... that to a person's detriment: (1) takes advantage of the lack of knowledge, ability, experience or capacity of a person to a grossly unfair degree; or (2) results in a gross disparity between the value received by a person and the price paid.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Federal courts generally permit [New Mexico Unfair Practices Act] actions in price-fixing cases provided that the plaintiff alleges a 'gross disparity' between the price paid for a product and the value received.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the plaintiff suffered injury as a result of the deceptive act.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.