MIAMI (CN) - A Florida district court denied cross motions for summary judgment in a $375 million antitrust lawsuit and says it will soon determine the analysis methodology to be used at trial.
The case seems to have struck a chord with U.S. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman. He quoted Bob Dylan's "The Times They Are a-Changing" in the introduction of Wednesday's ruling, and urged both parties to take advice from the Beatles' "We Can Work it Out" in September 2013.
"The consequences of major changes, the subject that Mr. Dylan was singing about, are at the heart of this Sherman Act antitrust lawsuit seeking several hundred million dollars in treble damages," he wrote.
Soft-gel manufactuer Procaps sued Patheon after the pharmaceutical company acquired a Procaps competitor.
Procaps says the acquisition makes a collaboration agreement between the parties illegal under antritrust laws because Patheon is now a competitor in the soft-gel market.
The small parts of the motions for summary judgment that were granted by Goodman were Procaps' judgment that antitrust claim requirements for affecting interstate commerce have been satisfied, and Patheon's motion for summary judgment on common law unfair competition.
"There is no evidence that Patheon used or disclosed Procaps' confidential information or that there is customer confusion," he wrote.
Goodman said the court will soon issue an opinion that details "the specific structure of the rule of reason to be used at trial," according to the ruling.
"Because there is, in practical terms, a sliding scale in appraising reasonableness and because the quality of proof varies with the circumstances, the court will choose the methodology which will be applied under the broad category of the rule of reason after an amended trial scheduling order is entered," he wrote. "The court expects to enter an amended trial scheduling order after the forensic analysis of Procaps' electronically stored information is complete."