15.) But, as explained below, Plaintiffs need not plead around affirmative defenses like statutes of limitations. Presently before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims as time-barred. When Plaintiffs learned about Defendants’ conduct and realized that Defendants had been charging Plaintiffs supracompetitive prices- prices higher than those that would be set in a competitive market-for card shufflers, Plaintiffs brought the present antitrust suit seeking damages and injunctive relief. But, Plaintiffs say, Defendants obtained fraudulent patents for those card shufflers and engaged in sham lawsuits to enforce those patents. purchased automatic playing card shufflers from Defendants Scientific Games Corporation, Bally Technologies, Inc., and Bally Gaming, Inc. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Casino Queen Marquette, Inc. SCIENTIFIC GAMES CORPORATION BALLY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 36 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION CASINO QUEEN MARQUETTE, INC.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |