DocketNumber： 05-35627, 05-35640, 05-36153, 05-36202
Judges： Gould, Johnnie, Paez, Rawlinson, Richard, Ronald
Filed Date： 3/19/2007
Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 11/5/2024
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CASCADE HEALTH SOLUTIONS FKA MCKENZIE-WILLIAMETTE HOSPITAL, an Oregon nonprofit corporation, No. 05-35627 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. CV-02-06032-ALH District of Oregon, PEACEHEALTH, a Washington State Portland nonprofit corporation, Defendant-Appellee. CASCADE HEALTH SOLUTIONS FKA MCKENZIE-WILLIAMETTE HOSPITAL, an Oregon nonprofit corporation, No. 05-35640 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. CV-02-06032-HA District of Oregon, PEACEHEALTH, a Washington State Portland nonprofit corporation, Defendant-Appellant. CASCADE HEALTH SOLUTIONS FKA MCKENZIE-WILLIAMETTE HOSPITAL, an Oregon nonprofit corporation, No. 05-36153 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. CV-02-06032-HA District of Oregon, PEACEHEALTH, a Washington State Portland nonprofit corporation, Defendant-Appellant. 3287 3288 CASCADE HEALTH v. PEACEHEALTH CASCADE HEALTH SOLUTIONS FKA MCKENZIE-WILLIAMETTE HOSPITAL, No. 05-36202 an Oregon nonprofit corporation, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CV-02-06032-HA District of Oregon, PEACEHEALTH, a Washington State Portland nonprofit corporation, ORDER Defendant-Appellee. Filed March 20, 2007 Before: Ronald M. Gould, Richard A. Paez, and Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Circuit Judges. ORDER The court invites supplemental briefs by any amicus curiae addressing the following issue raised in this appeal: Whether a plaintiff who seeks to establish the predatory or anticompe- titive conduct element of an attempted monopolization claim under § 2 of the Sherman Act by showing that the defendant offered bundled discounts to the defendant’s customers must prove that the defendant’s prices were below an appropriate measure of the defendant’s costs. If so, what is the appropriate measure of costs and how should the trial court instruct the jury on the matter of costs? If not, what standard should the trial court instruct the jury to use to determine whether the bundled discounts are predatory or anticompetitive? Any briefs responding to this order shall be filed no later than thirty days from the filed date of this order. All briefs shall comply with the page or type-volume limitations set forth in Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 29(d) and CASCADE HEALTH v. PEACEHEALTH 3289 32(a)(7). Any person or entity wishing to file a brief as an amicus curiae in response to this order is granted leave to do so pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a). PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2007 Thomson/West.