from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
See other cases from the District of Columbia Circuit.
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
Writ of certiorari DISMISSED as improvidently granted. These cases were granted to resolve �[w]hether allegations that members of a business association agreed to adhere to the association�s rules and possess governance rights in the association, without more, are sufficient to plead the element of conspiracy in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act..� Pet. for Cert. in No. 15-961, p. i, and No. 15-962, p. I. After �[h]aving persuaded us to grant certiorari� on this issue, however, petitioners �chose to rely on a different argument� in their merits briefing. City and County of San Francisco v. Sheehan, 575 U. S. __, (2015) (slip op., at 7). The Court, therefore, orders that the writs in these cases be dismissed as improvidently granted. VIDED.
Reply of petitioners Visa Inc., et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.
Record received from the U.S.D.C. District of Columbia is electronic and located on PACER.
Record received from U.S.C.A. District of Columbia Circuit is electronic and located on PACER. Also received are the oral argument transcripts, this record is electronic.
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. District of Columbia Circuit.
CIRCULATED.
Brief amicus curiae of American Antitrust Institute filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Brief amicus curiae of ATM Industry Association filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Brief amici curiae of National Retail Federation, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Brief amici curiae of Antitrust Law Professors and Economists filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Brief amicus curiae of Public Justice, P.C. filed. VIDED.
Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. VIDED.
Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. VIDED.
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, December 7, 2016. VIDED
Brief amicus curiae of United States Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, Inc. filed. VIDED.
Brief of the Non-Consumer Respondents filed. VIDED.
Brief of respondents Consumer Respondents filed. VIDED.
Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioners GRANTED. VIDED
Brief amici curiae of Antitrust Law Professors filed. VIDED.
Brief amici curiae of Financial Industry Associations filed. VIDED.
Brief amici curiae of American Society of Association Executives, et al. filed. VIDED.
Brief amici curiae of Chamber of the United States of America, et al. filed. VIDED.
Brief of petitioners Visa Inc., et al. filed. VIDED.
Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioners Visa Inc., et al. VIDED.
Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party from counsel for the petitioners. VIDED
The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 1, 2016. VIDED
The time to file respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including October 17, 2016. VIDED
Petition GRANTED The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 15-962 is granted. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.
Rescheduled.
Reply of petitioners Visa Inc., et al. filed.
Brief of respondents Sam Osborn, Andrew Mackmin, Barbara Inglis in opposition filed. VIDED.
Brief amici curiae of American Society of Association Executives filed.
Brief amici curiae of Antitrust Law Professors filed.
Order extending time to file response to petition to and including March 30, 2016.
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 29, 2016)
Application (15A653) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until January 27, 2016.
Application (15A653) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 27, 2015 to January 27, 2016, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Visa Inc., et al., Petitioner, represented by Neal Kumar Katyal
Visa Inc., et al., Petitioner, represented by Anthony J. Franze
Visa Inc., et al., Petitioner, represented by Boris Bershteyn
Consumer Respondents, Respondent, represented by Steve W. Berman
The National ATM Council, Inc., et al., Respondent, represented by Jonathan L. Rubin
The Non-Consumer Respondents., Respondent, represented by Thomas C. Goldstein
American Antitrust Institute, Amicus Curiae, represented by Richard M. Brunell
American Society of Association Executives, et al., Amicus Curiae, represented by Eamon Paul Joyce
Antitrust Law Professors, Amicus Curiae, represented by Seth P. Waxman
Antitrust Law Professors and Economists, Amicus Curiae, represented by Gary J. Malone
ATM Industry Association, Amicus Curiae, represented by Richard Henry Dolan
Chamber of the United States of America, et al., Amicus Curiae, represented by Elizabeth Petrela Papez
Financial Industry Associations, Amicus Curiae, represented by Richard S. Taffet
National Retail Federation, et al., Amicus Curiae, represented by James A. Wilson
Public Justice, P.C., Amicus Curiae, represented by F. Paul Bland Jr.
United States, Amicus Curiae, represented by Ian Heath Gershengorn
United States Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, Inc., Amicus Curiae, represented by Michael Colin Landis