News, Developments and Practical Advice from Antitrust Leaders

Antitrust Advocate

Home | Antitrust Advocate

Partners <a href="https://www.bakerlaw.com/RobertGAbrams">Robert Abrams</a>, <a href="https://www.bakerlaw.com/GregoryJComminsJr">Gregory Commins</a>, and <a href="https://www.bakerlaw.com/DanyllWFoix">Danyll Foix</a> authored an article published in the <em>Global Competition Review’s</em> “The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2018.” Their article reviews how the “plausibility” pleading standard announced by the Supreme Court in recent years has changed not only how claims are alleged, but also how this standard may be useful in motions to dismiss, strike, and amend antitrust and class action claims. In these motions, three decisive substantive issues have emerged – whether standing is plausibly alleged, whether the alleged class includes uninjured members, and whether the alleged class members are ascertainable. Their article considers plausibility-based motions that can challenge claims at the onset of antitrust and class action litigation and the emerging substantive issues to be considered by parties pursuing or defending antitrust class action litigation.

<i><a class="js-autopdflink" href="https://www.bakerlaw.com/webfiles/Litigation/2017/Articles/US-Private-Antitrust-Litigation.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Read the article</a>.</i>

Did You Know the ‘Plausibility’ Standard Can Be Used for More Than Pleading Antitrust Claims?