No. 18-32
Philadelphia Taxi Association, Inc., et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
Response Waived
Tags: anti-competitive anti-competitive-behavior antitrust antitrust-law clayton-act competition economic-harm illegal-activity market-competition market-power marketplace-presence monopolization predatory predatory-conduct predatory-pricing sherman-act unfair-competition
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. When is an illegal presence in the marketplace predatory, anti-competitive and threatens to harm competition and not solely competitors?
2. Does the Second Amended Complaint allege illegal and unlawful conduct in the market which, in fact, is anti-competitive and threatens to harm competition and not simply defendant's competitors?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When is an illegal presence in the marketplace predatory, anti-competitive and threatens to harm competition and not solely competitors?
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-07-20
Waiver of right of respondent Uber Technologies, Inc. to respond filed.
2018-06-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 6, 2018)
Attorneys
Philadelphia Taxi Assoc., inc., et al.
Stephen Ross Bolden — Fell & Spalding, Petitioner
Uber Technologies, Inc.
Steven A. Reed — Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Respondent