In re Live Concert Antitrust Litigation
863 F. Supp. 2d 966
C.D. Cal.2012Background
- MDL involving multiple regional antitrust complaints against Clear Channel regarding live rock concert promotion.
- Court previously certified five geographic markets but later adopted a clean slate after Dukes v. Wal‑Mart change in standard.
- Current motions include: exclude Dr. Phillips’ testimony, class decertification, and two market‑specific summary judgments.
- Court granted in part the Rule 702/Daubert motion to exclude Dr. Phillips’ testimony.
- Court granted summary judgment on Sherman Act claims in Denver and Los Angeles based on definitional failures; other motions dismissed as moot.
- Court ordered further meet-and-confer to determine path forward for remaining MDL actions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Dr. Phillips under Rule 702/Daubert | Phillips’ methodology and data were reliable and relevant | Phillips’ analyses were flawed and unreliable | Phillips testimony excluded under Rule 702 |
| Reliability of Phillips’ market definition | Live rock music concerts constitute a valid market | Market definition unreliable and inadequately supported | Market definition inadmissible under Daubert/Rule 702 |
| Summary judgment on Sherman Act monopolization claims | Market power shown via defined market and Phillips analysis | Without admissible market, no prima facie market power | Summary judgment granted for monopolization/attempted monopolization in Denver and Los Angeles |
| Unjust enrichment claims | Unjust enrichment arising from Sherman Act claims | No independent basis apart from Sherman Act | Unjust enrichment claims granted/dismissed as moot in light of Rule 702 issues |
Key Cases Cited
- Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (U.S. 1986) (regression analysis probative value hinges on major variables)
- Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 (U.S. 1962) (practical indicia for submarket boundaries; cross-elasticity relevance)
- In re REMEC Inc. Sec. Litig., 702 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (S.D. Cal. 2010) (before‑after event study with multiple factors; admissibility under Daubert)
- Dukes v. Wal‑Mart Stores, Inc., 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) (Supreme Court standard for class certification with rigorous analysis)
- Oracle Corp., 331 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (N.D. Cal. 2004) (regulatory‑economics evidence; Daubert considerations)
- Rebel Oil Co. v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 51 F.3d 1421 (9th Cir. 1995) (cross‑elasticity and market definition considerations)
- IT & T v. General Tel. & Elec. Corp., 518 F.2d 913 (9th Cir. 1975) (Brown Shoe indicia and market delineation relevance)
- Dukes v. Wal‑Mart Stores, Inc., 603 F.3d 571 (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc decision relied on for subsequent Supreme Court ruling)