Motorola Mobility’s Petition for En Banc Review
This news is a bit dated, but on December 17, 2014 Motorola Mobility petitioned the Seventh Circuit for an en banc hearing of its price-fixing damages case against AU Optronics and other liquid-crystal-display panel makers. On November 26, 2014 a three-judge panel affirmed, on different grounds, its vacated opinion dismissing Motorola Mobility’s suit. In an opinion written by Judge Posner, the panel held that purchases by made overseas by Motorola’s foreign subsidiaries of panels that were incorporated into products subsequently shipped into the United States did not meet the second prong of the FTAIA requirements, that the effect of anticompetitive conduct give rise to an antitrust cause of action. 15 U.S.C. Section 6(a)(2). “Whether or not Motorola was harmed indirectly, the immediate victims of the price-fixing were its foreign subsidiaries.” Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics Corp., 2014 WL 6678622 (7th Cir. 2014). In its petition for rehearing en banc, Motorola claims: