In Re ATM Fee Antitrust Litigation

Summarized by:

  • Court: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Archives
  • Area(s) of Law: Standing
  • Date Filed: 07-12-2012
  • Case #: 10-17354
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Circuit Judge N.R. Smith for the Court; Circuit Judges Lucero and Callahan
  • Full Text Opinion

Plaintiffs alleging price fixing of ATM fees may not bring an antitrust lawsuit when they are not direct payers of the fee.

The plaintiffs alleged a price fixing of ATM fees on ATM's not owned by the card holder's bank. The district court concluded on summary judgment that the plaintiffs had no standing to bring the suit because plaintiffs are indirect purchasers of the allegedly fixed fee. The Court upheld the ruling based on the Supreme Courts decision in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977). The Supreme Court held that indirect purchasers may not recover damages, and thus have no standing to sue, based on pass-on theory of charges and fees. The Court found there was no genuine issue of material fact and therefore AFFIRMED the lower court decision.

Advanced Search