ENTENTE SUR LE PRIX DES EBOOKS Apple Appeal

Informations

• Publié par: IDBOOX
• Publié le: 26 février 2014
• Nombre de lectures: 179

Extrait

Case: 13-3741 Document: 157 Page: 1 02/25/2014 1165341 75
13-3741(L) -3748(CON), 13-3783(CON), 13-3857(CON), 13-3864(CON), 13-3867(CON)

United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit
________________________________________
UNITED STATES,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
APPLE INC.,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York
No. 12-cv-2826 (DLC)
APPELLANT APPLE INC.’S OPENING BRIEF
(PAGE PROOF)

Cynthia E. Richman Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr.
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP Counsel of Record
1050 Connecticut Avenue N.W. Daniel G. Swanson
Washington, D.C. 20036 Blaine H. Evanson
[phone] GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue Orin S. Snyder
Los Angeles, California 90071 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
[phone] 200 Park Avenue
[e-mail] New York, New York 10116
[phone]
Attorneys for Appellant Apple Inc.
Case: 13-3741 Document: 157 Page: 2 02/25/2014 1165341 75

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure,
defendant-appellant Apple Inc. states that it has no parent corporation. To the best
of Apple’s knowledge and belief, and based on publicly filed disclosures, as of
February 25, 2014, no publicly held corporation owns 10% or more of Apple’s
stock.

i Case: 13-3741 Document: 157 Page: 3 02/25/2014 1165341 75

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.......... 2
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES............................................................................... 2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................. 3
STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................ 4
I. Apple’s Entry into the E-Books Market .......................... 4
II. Trial and Post-Trial Proceedings ................................................................... 10
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ...............12
STANDARD OF REVIEW .....................................................................................15
ARGUMENT ...........................................15
I. The District Court Erred in Finding Apple Liable for a Price-Fixing
Conspiracy ..................................................................... 16
A. The District Court’s Liability Theory Is Fundamentally Flawed ..........16
1. The District Court’s Holding That Apple Joined a Conspiracy in
Mid-December 2009 Is Legally Baseless ......................................16
2. Pricing Discussions and Increased Prices Do Not Convert Lawful
Agreements into an Illegal Conspiracy ..........20
B. The District Court Applied the Wrong Legal Standards for
Evaluating Evidence in a Conspiracy Case ...........................................28
1. The District Court Disregarded the “Stringent Standards” Limiting
Inferences in a Conspiracy Case ....................28
2. The District Court’s Inference of Conspiracy Flowed from Its
Misinterpretation of the Proper Legal Standards ...........................34
II. The District Court’s Application of the Per Se Rule and the Rule of
Reason Were Legally Incorrect ..................................................................... 46
A. The District Court Incorrectly Invoked the Per Se Rule .......................47
i Case: 13-3741 Document: 157 Page: 4 02/25/2014 1165341 75
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
B. The Legal Errors in the Court’s One-Paragraph Rule-of-Reason
Analysis Require Reversal .....................................................................54
III. The District Court Erred in Excluding Expert Testimony on the Price-
Reducing Effects of Apple’s Entry into the Market ...... 59
IV. The Injunction Should Be Vacated ................................................................ 62
CONCLUSION ........................................63


ii Case: 13-3741 Document: 157 Page: 5 02/25/2014 1165341 75

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page

Cases
Acquaire v. Canada Dry Bottling Co. of N.Y.,
24 F.3d 401 (2d Cir. 1994) ..................................................................... 18, 21
Am. Tobacco Co. v. United States,
328 U.S. 781 (1946).......................................................................................16
Apple Inc. v. Motorola Inc.,
No. 11-cv-8540 (N.D. Ill. May 24, 2012) .....................36
Ark. Carpenters Health & Welfare Fund v. Bayer AG,
604 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2010) ............................................................................54
Atl. Richfield Co. v. USA Petroleum Co.,
495 U.S. 328 (1990)................................................................................ 47, 53
In re Baby Food Antitrust Litig.,
166 F.3d 112 (3d Cir. 1999) ..........................................................................30
Baker v. Dalkon Shield Claimants Trust,
156 F.3d 248 (1st Cir. 1998)..........61
Barry Wright Corp. v. ITT Grinnell Corp.,
724 F.2d 227 (1st Cir. 1983)..........................................................................24
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,
550 U.S. 544 (2007).................................................................... 15, 19, 28, 32
Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wis. v. Marshfield Clinic,
65 F.3d 1406 (7th Cir. 1995) ............................................................ 20, 42, 53
BOC Int’l, Ltd. v. FTC,
557 F.2d 24 (2d Cir. 1977) ............................................27
Bookhouse of Stuyvesant Plaza Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.,
2013 WL 6311202 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2013) .................57
Brantley v. NBC Universal, Inc.,
675 F.3d 1192 (9th Cir. 2012) .......................................................................23
iii Case: 13-3741 Document: 157 Page: 6 02/25/2014 1165341 75
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
Broad. Music, Inc. v. Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc.,
441 U.S. 1 (1979) ...........................................................................................50
Brooke Grp. Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.,
509 U.S. 209 (1993).... 27, 44, 58, 60
Bus. Elecs. Corp. v. Sharp Elecs. Corp.,
485 U.S. 717 (1988).......................................................................... 48, 49, 50
Cameron v. City of N.Y.,
598 F.3d 50 (2d Cir. 2010) ............................................................................15
Capital Imaging Assocs., P.C. v. Mohawk Valley Med. Assocs., Inc.,
996 F.2d 537 (2d Cir. 1993) ............................. 14, 54, 55
Cobell v. Norton,
334 F.3d 1128 (D.C. Cir. 2003) .............................................................. 14, 63
Cont’l T.V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc.,
433 U.S. 36 (1977).................................................................................. 48, 54
Day v. Taylor,
400 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2005) ....................................................................39
Easley v. Cromartie,
532 U.S. 234 (2001).......................................................................................15
In re Elec. Books Antitrust Litig.,
859 F. Supp. 2d 671 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) .................... 48, 55
F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. v. Empagran S.A.,
542 U.S. 155 (2004).......................................................................................62
FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.,
132 S. Ct. 2307 (2012) ...................29
Geneva Pharm. Tech. Corp. v. Barr Labs. Inc.,
386 F.3d 485 (2d Cir. 2004) ..........................................................................54
Gill v. N.Y. City Transit Auth.,
216 F. App’x 50 (2d Cir. 2007) .....61
Godwin v. Hunt Wesson, Inc.,
150 F.3d 1217 (9th Cir. 1998) .......................................................................34
iv Case: 13-3741 Document: 157 Page: 7 02/25/2014 1165341 75
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
Gorlick Distrib. Ctrs., LLC v. Car Sound Exhaust Sys., Inc.,
723 F.3d 1019 (9th Cir. 2013) .......................................................................50
H.L. Hayden Co. of N.Y., Inc. v. Siemens Med. Sys., Inc.,
879 F.2d 1005 (2d Cir. 1989) ... 21, 22, 29, 30, 31, 33, 37
Howard Hess Dental Labs. Inc. v. Dentsply Int’l, Inc.,
602 F.3d 237 (3d Cir. 2010) ..........................................................................25
Ill. Corp. Travel, Inc. v. Am. Airlines, Inc.,
806 F.2d 722 (7th Cir. 1986) .........21
Int’l Distrib. Ctrs., Inc. v. Walsh Trucking Co.,
812 F.2d 786 (2d Cir. 1987) ............................................................. 28, 31, 33
Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States,
306 U.S. 208 (1939).......................................................................... 26, 49, 50
Jefferson Parish Hosp. Dist. No. 2 v. Hyde,
466 U.S. 2 (1984) .............. 14, 54, 57
Leegin Creative Leather Prods., Inc. v. PSKS, Inc.,
551 U.S. 877 (2007).................... 12,