Whether the Ninth Circuit's decision, by failing properly to acknowledge the evidence Ireland presented, has so far departed from the proper application of the summary judgment standard that this Court should intervene and summarily reverse the decision to prevent it from undermining the fundamental objectives of antitrust law

QUESTION PRESENTED This case centers on petitioner’s claim that defendants violated § 1 of the Sherman Act by forming a conspiracy among multiple, independent neurology practices that drove a competing neurologist, Stephen Ireland, M.D. (“Ireland”), and his clinic, Neurology of Bend (“NOB”) from the Bend, Oregon neurology market, decreasing the output of neurologic services and injuring competition and patient welfare by reducing or eliminating access to neurologic care in that market. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment to defendants on Ireland’s antitrust claim. The court held that Ireland failed to raise a genuine dispute as to whether the defendants intended to unreasonably restrain trade or as to whether their conduct caused actual injury to competition. App. A at 2a. In a civil antitrust case, U.S. v. Diebold, Inc., 369 U.S. 654 (1962) (per curiam), and in Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650 (2014) (per curiam) this Court summarily reversed summary judgment because the lower courts failed properly to acknowledge the plaintiffs’ evidence. The question presented is: Whether the Ninth Circuit’s decision, by failing properly to acknowledge the evidence Ireland presented, has so far departed from the proper application of the summary judgment standard that this Court should intervene and summarily reverse the decision to prevent it from undermining the fundamental objectives of antitrust law.