- Affirmative Recovery
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Ediscovery
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Litigation Support Services
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
-
September 18, 2020Teresa Fariss Mcclain Recognized as Woman worth Watching by Profiles in Diversity Journal
-
September 17, 2020Robins Kaplan LLP Files New Lawsuit Against Delbarton School and the Order of St. Benedict of New Jersey on behalf of Survivors of Child Sex Abuse
-
September 17, 2020Roman Silberfeld Named to Annual List of Top 100 Attorneys in California
-
September 23, 202010th Annual Disability Justice Seminar
-
September 24, 2020Human Rights Campaign National Virtual Event: Unite for Equality
-
September 26, 20202020 Virtual Walk Like MADD Minnesota
-
August 24, 2020Hot off the Presses: California Further Regulates Out-of-State Adjusters in the Wake of Record-Breaking Catastrophic Losses
-
August 26, 2020INSIGHT: Avoiding Trade Secret Claims After Seeing a Competitor’s Crown Jewels
-
Fall 2020Conservation Easement Deductions: How Recent Tax Law Developments Have Created A New Area of Legal Malpractice Litigation
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Read our attorneys' take on the latest news and trends in the legal and business industries.
Judge Keeps Intact Much of Auto Parts Antitrust MDL
June 6, 2013
All Content © 2003-2013, Portfolio Media, Inc.
Law360, New York (June 06, 2013, 7:49 PM ET) ‐‐ A Michigan federal judge on Thursday trimmed some indirect purchaser claims from multidistrict litigation accusing auto parts makers of bid‐rigging and price‐fixing on automotive wire harnesses, but refused to toss federal antitrust claims lodged by a group of direct purchasers of the products.
U.S. District Judge Marianne Batani partially granted and partially denied a motion to dismiss allegations lodged by two putative classes of indirect wire‐harness purchasers — one comprising auto dealers, another comprising consumers — throwing out certain state law claims against several auto parts companies, including Yazaki Corp., Denso Corp. and Nippon Seiki Co. Ltd.
Law360
Related Professionals
Hollis Salzman
Partner
Managing Partner, New York Office;
Co-Chair, Antitrust and Trade Regulation Group;
Member of the Executive Board
Related Publications
August 24, 2020
Hot off the Presses: California Further Regulates Out-of-State Adjusters in the Wake of Record-Breaking Catastrophic Losses
Christina Lincoln - California Lawyers Association Business Law News
August 26, 2020
INSIGHT: Avoiding Trade Secret Claims After Seeing a Competitor’s Crown Jewels
Jake Holdreith, David Prange, Emily Tremblay - Bloomberg Law
Fall 2020
Conservation Easement Deductions: How Recent Tax Law Developments Have Created A New Area of Legal Malpractice Litigation
Craig Weiner, Qian Julie Wang, Alexander Newman - REAL TALK: The Robins Kaplan Business Law Update Fall 2020
Fall 2020
Don’t Stop the Music: The Intersection Between Insurance and The Music Industry in the Era of COVID-19
Carly Kessler, Lauren Birkenstock - REAL TALK: The Robins Kaplan Business Law Update Fall 2020
Fall 2020
Facing Novel Legal Issues Concerning Facial Recognition Technology in 2020
Reena Jain - REAL TALK: The Robins Kaplan Business Law Update Fall 2020
Related News
September 18, 2020
September 17, 2020
September 17, 2020
September 15, 2020
September 15, 2020
Back to Top
Any information that you send us in an e-mail message should not be confidential or otherwise privileged information. Sending us an e-mail message will not make you a client of Robins Kaplan LLP. We do not accept representation until we have had an opportunity to evaluate your matter, including but not limited to an ethical evaluation of whether we are in a conflict position to represent you. Accordingly, the information you provide to us in an e-mail should not be information for which you would have an expectation of confidentiality.
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.