Whether the lower Courts may specifically decline to follow the decisions by this Court in deciding whether the acquisition of American Airlines by US Airways violated Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This Court’s opinion in Brown Shoe, 370 U.S. 294 (1962) and its progeny have since the late 1960’s set the quantum of evidence necessary to prove a violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act. These decisions have not been overruled. Nor has Congress changed them. Notwithstanding, the lower courts in this case conspicuously refused to follow this Court’s decisions, opting instead to apply a so-called “modern” approach to merger cases. The questions presented are: Whether the lower Courts may specifically decline to follow the decisions by this Court in deciding whether the acquisition of American Airlines by US Airways violated Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act. This acquisition eliminated a significant competitor from the market in a non-trivial transaction of $11 billion, thereby creating the largest airline in the United States with the potential and subsequent result of raising prices, reducing capacity, eroding services, eliminating flights, shutting down hubs and laying off thousands of employees. Whether, after the Court below denied the Plaintiffs’ motions for injunction pursuant to Section 16 of the Clayton Act, and the threatened injuries in fact occurred depriving the Plaintiffs of the substantial benefits of competition, the lower Courts erroneously denied the Petitioners’ motion to amend their complaint pursuant to Rule 15 FRCivP to include a claim for injury and damage pursuant to Section 4 of the Clayton Act and the Plaintiffs’ demand for trial by jury under the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.