 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
ED COMPLAINT
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PRICE DEFENDANTS COURT IMPORTERS EVIDENCE BRISTOL BAY SUMMARY JUDGMENT CONSPIRACY ENDNOTE GROUNDS PRICES SALMON FIX ALASKA TRACKING SOCKEYE SALMON SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD PRICE VERIFICATIONS REASONABLENESS COMPETITION COMMUNICATIONS WARDS COVE ALLEGED CONSPIRACY CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE PLAINTIFFS ARGUE JAPANESE IMPORTERS CUSTOM PROCESSING FUTURE PRICING INTENTIONS CONSISTENT CONSCIOUS PARALLELISM |
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT LOUIE ALAKAYAK, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. ALL ALASKAN SEAFOODS, INC., et al.,Defendants. Case No. 3AN-95-04676CI ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO ALL PROCESSOR DEFENDANTS (Mtn tracking # 202) This order grants summary judgment to the processor defendants accused of conspiring to fix the s 1989 through 1995. An order granting summary judgment to the importers defendants who are order. Section I provides an introduction to this order. The applicable summary judgment standard and III. Section IV discusses how all defendants' have met their burden of proof by denying that in Bristol Bay. Since the defendants meet their burden of proof, the burden of proof then shifts iscuss the direct and circumstantial evidence that the plaintiffs provided to the court to meet evidence is viewed as a whole. Additionally, in section VII, the court finds that the plaintiffs' he alleged conspiracy between processors. Finally, section VIII is a conclusion. I. INTRODUCTION The plaintiffs' class in this suit is made up of fishers who harvested sockeye salmon from the he defendants are made up of processors who purchased sockeye from the plaintiffs (see endnote 1)SNIPPETS: |
|
2
.
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO THE IMPORTER DEFENDANTS
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PLAINTIFFS IMPORTER DEFENDANTS EVIDENCE CONSPIRACY SUMMARY JUDGMENT PROCESSOR DEFENDANTS COURT GROUNDS PRICES AGREEMENT ALLEGED CONSPIRACY FIX GROUNDS PRICES ENDNOTE OPPOSITION ALASKA ORDER GRANTING JAPANESE IMPORTERS BRISTOL BAY MOTION ALAK OPP WOODBINE NISSUI ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE COST PLUS CONTRACT NICHIREI SUPERIOR COURT HORIZONTAL CONSPIRACY EVIDENCE TENDING INFERRING |
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT LOUIE ALAKAYAK, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. ALL ALASKAN SEAFOODS, INC., et al., Defendants. Case No. 3AN-95-04676CI ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO THE IMPORTER DEFENDANTS (Mtn tracking # 188) I. INTRODUCTION The plaintiffs allege a horizontal conspiracy between processors to fix grounds prices in Bristol #1) This order is issued in conjunction with the court's order granting all processors defendants summary judgment standard and applicable law in the order granting all processor defendants II. IMPORTER DEFENDANTS HAVE MET THEIR BURDEN OF PROOF As discussed in the courts' order granting summary judgment to all processors defendants, all t they participated in a conspiracy to fix grounds prices in Bristol Bay. Accordingly, the ble evidence, that the importer defendants participated in the a conspiracy among processors to fix III. PLAINTIFFS HAVE NOT SHOWN EVIDENCE TENDING TO PROVE THAT ALL IMPORTER DEFENDANTS COLLECTIVELY The plaintiffs in their opposition brief explain that: The Japanese importers joined [the alleged] conspiracy in one of two ways: they either collectively decided to join it. (endnote #3)SNIPPETS: |
|
|
| | | |
|
|
