Posted by
Akinola Olusegun
on
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
A 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel in August ordered the dismissal of the lawsuit against Chinese companies Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co Ltd and North China Pharmaceutical Group Corp. The panel judges, voting 2-1, concluded there was a "true conflict" between U.S. and Chinese antitrust law that meant the defendants could not comply with U.S. legal provisions.
In their petition seeking en banc review or panel rehearing, lawyers for Texas-based Animal Science Products Inc and New Jersey-based Ra nis Co Inc argued that the panel decision, if left in place, "invites judicial micromanagement of foreign policy powers reserved to the political branches."
William Isaacson of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to a message on Wednesday seeking comment. Isaacson represents the plaintiffs with lawyers from Willkie Farr & Gallagher, Hausfeld and Susman Godfrey.
Jonathan Jacobson of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, who represents the Chinese company defendants, told Reuters on Wednesday that "the petition r aises nothing remotely problematic with the court's decision."
Circuit Judge William Nardini, joined by Circuit Judge Jose Cabranes, concluded in the panel ruling that Chinese law required Hebei Welcome and North China Pharmaceutical "to engage in price-fixing of Vitamin C sold on the international market."
Relevant Chinese regulations "required the defendants to collude on Vitamin C export prices and quantities as part and parcel of China's export regime for Vitamin C," Nardini wrote.
Circuit Judge Richard Wesley wrote the dissent, which disputed the majority's conclusion that Chinese law required the defendants to coordinate on the price of vitamin C exports.
Isaacson and co-counsel for the plaintiffs asserted in their petition that the panel decision crafted a new test – without congressional support – to assess whether a key U.S. antitrust law reaches conduct overseas.
"Absent further review, the panel decision vests courts with virtually unbounde d discretion to rewrite duly enacted statutes based upon judicial speculation about foreign policy," the plaintiffs' lawyers wrote.
The case is Animal Science Products Inc v Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co Ltd, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 13-4791.
For the plaintiffs: William Isaacson of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; Michael Gottlieb of Willkie Farr & Gallagher; Michael Hausfeld of Hausfeld; and James Southwick of Susman Godfrey
For the defendants: Jonathan Jacobson of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
Chinese vitamin C price-fixing lawsuit thrown out by U.S. appeals court
Comments
Post a Comment