PacBell v. linkLine: Case on Monopolizing the DSL Market to be heard Dec 8

On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. linkLine Communications. The case could decide whether a company not obligated under antitrust law to sell to others at wholesale prices can be held liable for variations in its wholesale and retail price levels. In 2003, several Internet service providers, including Linkline Communications Inc., filed suit against Pacific Bell Telephone Co., contending that the AT&T unit monopolized and attempted to monopolize the relevant DSL Internet services market, in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, by, among other things, "creat[ing] a price squeeze by charging ISPs a high wholesale price in relation to the price at which defendants were providing retail services." Pacific Bell asked the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to dismiss the case on the grounds that the U.S. Supreme Court's 2004 decision in Verizon Comms. Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko compelled judgment in its favor. The district court denied that motion, holding that "because a price-squeeze claim is actionable under existing antitrust standards, and because the Ninth Circuit has upheld the viability of price-squeeze claims in the context of highly regulated industries, Trinko does not bar Plaintiffs' price-squeeze claim."