No. 25-326

Real Estate Exchange, Inc., a Delaware Corporation v. Zillow Group, Inc., a Washington Corporation, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2025-09-18
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (2)Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: antitrust business-association circuit-split conspiracy optional-rule sherman-act
Key Terms:
Antitrust JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2025-12-12 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a business association that publishes an optional rule for its members can immunize the rule from being considered a conspiracy under Sherman Act Section 1

Question Presented (from Petition)

Around ten years ago t his Court granted certiorari “to resolve ‘whether allegations that members of a business association agreed to adhere to the association’s rules and possess governance rights in the association, without more, is sufficient to plead the element of conspiracy in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.’” Visa Inc. v. Osborn , 137 S. Ct. 289 , 289 (2016) (citations omitted) . “[H]owever, petitioner chose to rely on a different argument in their merits briefing” so the writ was dismissed as improvidently granted. Id. at 289–90 (citation omitted). Since then , the circuit split has deepened on whether a business association ’s rules are a conspiracy subject to Section 1 of the Sherman Act. This appeal presents an effective vehicle for addressing a question that encompasses the granted question in Visa Inc. v. Osborn : Whether a business association that publishes a rule for its members can immunize the rule, and members’ adherence to it, from being considered a conspiracy subject to Sherman Act Section 1 by making the rule optional —as held by the Ninth Circuit below and the Tenth Circuit —or whether an association’s rule can be a conspiracy even if optional —as held by the First , Third, and Fifth Circuits and supported by the Department of Justice and this Court’s precedent .

Docket Entries

2025-12-15
Rehearing DENIED.
2025-11-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/12/2025.
2025-11-14
2025-11-14
Petition of Real Estate Exchange, Inc. for rehearing submitted.
2025-10-20
Petition DENIED.
2025-10-14
Amicus brief of Antitrust Education Project submitted.
2025-10-14
Brief amicus curiae of Antitrust Education Project filed. (Distributed)
2025-10-14
Brief amicus curiae of Consumer Advocates in American Real Estate (CAARE) filed. (Distributed)
2025-10-14
Amicus brief of Consumer Advocates in American Real Estate (CAARE) submitted.
2025-10-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/17/2025.
2025-09-24
Waiver of right of respondent National Association of Realtors to respond filed.
2025-09-24
Waiver of right of respondent Zillow Group, Inc. to respond filed.
2025-09-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 20, 2025)
2025-08-13
Application (25A35) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until September 13, 2025.
2025-08-12
Application (25A35) to extend further the time from August 15, 2025 to September 13, 2025, submitted to Justice Kagan.
2025-07-09
Application (25A35) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until August 15, 2025.
2025-07-03
Application (25A35) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 15, 2025 to August 15, 2025, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Antitrust Education Project
David H. ThompsonCooper & Kirk, PLLC, Amicus
David H. ThompsonCooper & Kirk, PLLC, Amicus
Consumer Advocates in American Real Estate (CAARE)
Mark Jeffrey BeutlerLaw Offices of Mark J. Beutler, Amicus
Mark Jeffrey BeutlerLaw Offices of Mark J. Beutler, Amicus
National Association of Realtors
Christopher George MichelQuinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Respondent
Christopher George MichelQuinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Respondent
Real Estate Exchange, Inc.
Bennett Joseph RawickiHilgers Graben PLLC, Petitioner
Bennett Joseph RawickiHilgers Graben PLLC, Petitioner
Zillow Group, Inc.
Steven Andrew EngelDechert LLP, Respondent
Steven Andrew EngelDechert LLP, Respondent