1. Courts apply the per se rule when reviewing most tying arrangements and will, therefore, consider business
justifications proffered by the tying firm.
a.
True
b.
False
2. Without further inquiry, boycotts are per se illegal under the Sherman Act.
a.
True
b.
False
False
1
Moderate
16–2c Types of Horizontal Restraints
3. Patented or copyrighted products may confer market power on the owner in tying cases when there are high switching
costs.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
4. In order to avoid an unworkable construction of the Sherman Act, the courts have construed Section 1 to prohibit only
those restraints of trade that unreasonably restrict competition.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
16-2 Agreements in Restraint of Trade: Section 1 of the Sherman Act
False
1
Moderate
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
5. In order to find a violation of the Sherman Act, courts require evidence of an explicit agreement to violate the law.
a.
True
b.
False
6. Courts look more favorably on reductions in intrabrand competition when there is vigorous interbrand competition that
can prevent the reduction in intrabrand competition from harming consumers.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
7. Unilateral conduct may violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act under some circumstances.
a.
True
b.
False
False
1
Moderate
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
8. Horizontal agreements among competitors to avoid competition on nonprice matters cannot be a violation of Section 1
of the Sherman Act.
a.
True
b.
False
False
1
Moderate
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
False
1
Moderate
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
9. Firms can incur liability under Section 2 of the Sherman Act by acquiring monopoly power through corporate mergers
or acquisitions.
a.
True
b.
False
10. The Sherman Act applies only to “trade or commerce” within a state, between the states, or with foreign nations.
a.
True
b.
False
False
1
Easy
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-1 16-1 Jurisdictional Reach: Interstate or Foreign Trade and Commerce
Blooms: Comprehension
11. Predatory pricing is the attempt to eliminate rivals by undercutting their prices to the extent that their competitors lose
money and go out of business.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–3b Monopolistic Intent
Blooms: Comprehension
12. Vertical market division between a franchisor and a franchisee may be lawful when interbrand competition is
enhanced by the limitation on intrabrand competition.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
Blooms: Comprehension
13. The Supreme Court considers market divisions between competing firms to be so inherently anti-competitive as to
constitute per se violations of the Sherman Act.
True
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
16–3b Monopolistic Intent
Blooms: Comprehension
a.
True
b.
False
14. Market power is defined as the power to control prices or exclude competition in a relevant market.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
15. The merger of an airplane manufacturer and an airplane engine manufacturer would normally be considered a
conglomerate merger.
a.
True
b.
False
False
1
Moderate
16-5 Mergers: Section 7 of the Clayton Act
16. The Robinson-Patman Act prohibits a manufacturer from making any price discrimination among its customers.
a.
True
b.
False
False
1
Moderate
16-4 Price Discrimination: The Robinson–Patman Act
17. Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act is broader than the other antitrust laws.
a.
True
True
1
Moderate
16–2c Types of Horizontal Restraints
b.
False
18. The Local Government Antitrust Act expressly exempts municipalities from antitrust monetary damages, while
expressly limiting equitable remedies such as injunctions.
a.
True
b.
False
False
1
Moderate
16-7 State Action Exemption
19. Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act have extraterritorial reach.
a.
True
b.
False
1
16-9 The Extraterritorial Reach of U.S. Antitrust Law
20. Even when a U.S. court finds a foreign corporation in violation of the antitrust laws, any award of damages is
meaningless without foreign enforcement of the award unless the foreign corporation has assets in the U.S. that can be
attached to satisfy the judgment.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
16-9 The Extraterritorial Reach of U.S. Antitrust Law
21. One of the major differences between U.S. and European Union competition laws is the European Union’s treatment
of horizontal agreements.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
16-6 Unfair Methods of Competition: Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act
22. The European Union takes a stricter view of vertical territorial restraints because of their tendency to impede
continent-wide market integration.
a.
True
b.
False
True
1
Moderate
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
Global View: Competition Law in the European Union
Blooms: Comprehension
23. A(n) __________ is made up of product or service offerings by different manufacturers or sellers that are
economically interchangeable and may therefore be said to compete.
a.
interchangeable-brand product market
b.
market power interchange
c.
multiple-brand product market
d.
consumer surplus brand market
c
1
Challenging
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-3 Monopolies: Section 2 of the Sherman Act
Blooms: Comprehension
24. Section 2 of the Sherman Act prohibits:
a.
price discrimination.
b.
monopolies and attempts to monopolize.
c.
every contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade.
d.
mergers that threaten competition.
b
1
Moderate
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-3 Monopolies: Section 2 of the Sherman Act
Blooms:Comprehension
False
1
Moderate
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
Global View: Competition Law in the European Union
Blooms: Comprehension
25. Section 7 of the Clayton Act prohibits:
a.
price discrimination.
b.
monopolies and attempts to monopolize.
c.
every contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade.
d.
mergers that threaten competition.
26. The Robinson-Patman Act prohibits:
a.
certain price discrimination.
b.
monopolies and attempts to monopolize.
c.
every contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade.
d.
mergers that threaten competition.
a
1
Moderate
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-4 Price Discrimination: The Robinson–Patman Act
Blooms: Comprehension
27. The __________ concludes that market forces defeat most anticompetitive practices.
a.
Chicago School
b.
Antitrust School
c.
Contra-antitrust School
d.
Economic Forecasting Model
a
1
Moderate
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2b What Constitutes an Unreasonable Restraint of Trade?
Blooms: Comprehension
28. __________ competition is competition between companies producing the same type of product.
a.
Intrabrand
b.
Interbrand
c.
Vertical
d.
Oriented
b
d
1
Moderate
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-7 Mergers: Section 7 of the Clayton Act
Blooms: Comprehension
29. The plaintiffs in the Williamson Oil Co. v. Philip Morris USA case discussed in the text, alleged that tobacco
companies had conspired to fix prices. How did the court rule?
a.
The suit was dismissed because the plaintiffs could not establish any “plus factor” needed to proceed.
b.
The suit was allowed to proceed because no “plus factor” was needed.
c.
The suit was allowed to proceed because “plus factors” were established by plaintiffs.
d.
The suit was dismissed because the plaintiffs lacked standing.
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
Blooms: Comprehension
30. What was the first U.S. antitrust law?
a.
The Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act
b.
The Robinson-Patman Act
c.
The Clayton Act
d.
The Sherman Act
d
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
Introduction: Antitrust Violators Do the Time and Pay the Fine
Blooms: Configuration
31. Which of the following is true regarding private suits to enforce the Sherman Act?
a.
Private plaintiffs may recover three times the damages they have sustained as a result of violations of the act.
b.
Liability is joint and several among all conspirators.
c.
There is no requirement of standing.
d.
Private plaintiffs may recover three times the damages they have sustained as a result of violations of the act,
and liability is joint and several among all conspirators.
d
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–8d Private Suits
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
Blooms: Comprehension
32. Which of the following is an approach to analyzing the reasonableness of a restraint of trade?
a.
Totality rule
b.
Per se rule
c.
Rule of reason
d.
Both the per se rule and the rule of reason
d
1
Moderate
NATIONAL STANDARDS:
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
ACCREDITING STANDARDS:
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2b What Constitutes an Unreasonable Restraint of Trade?
Blooms: Comprehension
33. Under which of the following situations will courts usually find pricing legal?
a.
When the prices are above average variable cost but below average total cost and the company has excess
capacity.
b.
When the prices are above average variable cost but below average total cost and the company does not have
excess capacity.
c.
When the prices are below average variable cost and below average total cost and the company does not have
excess capacity.
d.
Only when prices are above both average variable cost and average total cost.
a
1
Moderate
NATIONAL STANDARDS:
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
ACCREDITING STANDARDS:
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–3b Monopolistic Intent
Blooms: Comprehension
34. An equilibrium in which scarce societal resources are allocated to the production of various goods and services up to
the point where the cost of the resources equals the benefit society reaps form their use is:
a.
productive efficiency.
b.
allocative efficiency.
c.
true efficiency.
d.
product efficiency.
b
1
Moderate
NATIONAL STANDARDS:
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
ACCREDITING STANDARDS:
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
Economic Perspective: Regulation of Natural Monopolies
Blooms: Comprehension
35. Which of the following refers to the principle that unless barriers to entry or other factors make a market structurally
conducive to monopolization, pricing below cost is not a Sherman Act violation, regardless of whether the defendant had
Blooms: Comprehension
monopolistic intent?
a.
The principle of certainty
b.
The principle of uncertainty
c.
The rule of improbability
d.
The rule of impossibility
36. Which of the following is true regarding monopoly law in China?
a.
Each offense is specifically set forth with no catch-all provisions.
b.
It is not used against foreign investors.
c.
It prevents behavior classified as abuse of dominant market position.
d.
China lacks an anti-monopoly law although drafting has been in process for several years.
1
United States – AACSB: Diversity
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
INternational Snapshot
Blooms: Comprehension
37. Which of the following is not an illegal horizontal market division?
a.
Division by a class of customers
b.
Division by exclusive distributorships
c.
Division by geographic territory
d.
Restricting product output
b
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2c Types of Horizontal Restraints
Blooms: Comprehension
38. Which of the following is true regarding enforcement under the antitrust laws?
a.
The U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission act as enforcement agents for the federal
antitrust laws.
b.
Only the U.S. Department of Justice acts as an enforcement agent for the federal antitrust laws.
c.
Only the Federal Trade Commission acts as an enforcement agent for the federal antitrust laws.
d.
The U.S. Department of Justice and the Consumer Fairness Commission act as enforcement agents for the
federal antitrust laws.
d
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–3b Monopolistic Intent
Blooms: Comprehension
39. Which of the following is true regarding conscious parallelism?
a.
Proof, standing alone, that firms changed prices at the same time is sufficient to prove a horizontal conspiracy
to set prices regardless of whether the firms initially set prices at the same levels.
b.
Proof, standing alone, that firms initially set prices at the same levels is sufficient to prove a horizontal
conspiracy to set prices regardless of whether the firms later changed prices at the same time.
c.
Showing that firms consistently set prices at the same levels and change prices at the same time is sufficient to
prove a horizontal conspiracy to set prices.
d.
Merely showing that firms consistently set prices at the same levels and change prices at the same time is
insufficient to prove a horizontal conspiracy to set prices.
d
1
Moderate
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
Blooms: Comprehension
40. For a monopoly to be found illegal, which of the following is relevant after market power is established?
a.
Single brand market
b.
Multiple brand market
c.
Collusion
d.
Monopolistic intent
d
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
41. Which of the following is NOT a defense to a Robinson-Patman price discrimination claim?
a.
Predatory pricing
b.
Not actual competitors for the same customer
c.
Cost justification
d.
Changing conditions
a
1
Challenging
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–4b Defenses
Blooms: Comprehension
a
1
Moderate
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-8 Antitrust Enforcement
Blooms: Comprehension
42. If a manufacturer of television sets acquires a magazine publisher, it will be a:
a.
vertical merger.
b.
horizontal merger.
c.
conglomerate merger.
d.
product-line.
43. In CASE 16.1 Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. (2013), Actavis sought to market a generic version of
AndroGel, which was owned by Solvay. The parties entered into a settlement agreement which required Solvay to pay
Actavis millions as compensation for “other services.” The FTC sued all parties, alleging violations of the Sherman Act.
The case involved a question of whether __________ should be analyzed under the __________ standard.
a.
reverse payment settlements, rule of reason
b.
vertical conspiracy, rule of reason
c.
horizontal conspiracy, rule of reason
d.
group boycotts, per se
a
1
Challenging
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
Blooms: Analysis
44. The agreement of all the commercial airlines not to lower their fares would be an example of a:
a.
vertical restraint of trade.
b.
horizontal restraint of trade.
c.
tying arrangement.
d.
monopoly.
b
1
Challenging
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2a What Constitutes a Contract, Combination, or Conspiracy?
Blooms: Application
45. With a(n) __________ distributorship, a manufacturer limits itself to a single distributor in a given territory.
a.
dual
b.
exclusive
c.
franchise
c
Moderate
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–3b Monopolistic Intent
Bloom: Comprehension
d.
market-power
46. In a __________ action under the Sherman Act, state attorneys general may bring civil actions for injuries sustained
by residents of their respective states.
a.
parens patriae
b.
private attorneys general
c.
Herfindahl-Hirschman
d.
resale price maintenance
a
1
Moderate
NATIONAL STANDARDS:
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
ACCREDITING STANDARDS:
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–8b Civil Suits by Federal or State Governments
Blooms: Comprehension
47. Horizontal price-fixing, such as an agreement between retailers to set a common price for a product, is the classic
example of a(n) __________ violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
a.
per se
b.
intentional
c.
rule of reason
d.
willful
a
1
Moderate
NATIONAL STANDARDS:
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
ACCREDITING STANDARDS:
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2b What Constitutes an Unreasonable Restraint of Trade?
Blooms: Comprehension
48. A manufacturer that sells its goods both wholesale and at retail is called a(n):
a.
conglomerate merger.
b.
dual distributor.
c.
essential facility.
d.
franchise.
1
NATIONAL STANDARDS:
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
b
1
Moderate
NATIONAL STANDARDS:
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
ACCREDITING STANDARDS:
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
Blooms: Comprehension
49. Which of the following is NOT true regarding Section 2 of the Sherman Act?
a.
Unilateral conduct may violate Section 2.
b.
Section 2 allows the mere possession of monopoly power.
c.
A firm violates Section 2 even if attains the monopoly power by superior performance.
d.
The offense of monopolization has two elements: monopoly power and proof that the defendant willfully
acquired or maintained that power through anticompetitive acts.
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-3 Monopolies: Section 2 of the Sherman Act
Blooms: Comprehension
50. Which of the following is a component of a market?
a.
A product component
b.
A geographic component
c.
A defined component
d.
Both a product component and a geographic component
d
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–3a Market Power
Blooms: Comprehension
51. In the European Union, the principal rules of competition law are set forth in which of the following?
a.
The Treaty of Amsterdam and the Merger Control Regulation
b.
The European Union Regulation and the Treaty of Amsterdam
c.
Only the European Union Regulation
d.
Only the Treaty of Amsterdam
1
United States – AACSB: Diversity
52. In CASE 16.2 Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. (2007), the U.S. Supreme Court overturned
precedent regarding __________, substituting the __________ treatment for the per se analysis.
a.
vertical market division, rule of reason
b.
minimum vertical price fixing, vertical market division
c.
resale price maintenance, rule of reason
d.
tying arrangements, rule of reason
1
Blooms: Comprehension
53. Which of the following is the objective of the rule of reason rule?
a.
To determine whether the requirements of the per se rule have been satisfied.
b.
To determine whether, on balance, the activity at issue promotes or restrains competition.
c.
To determine whether in a particular situation a horizontal price fixing has actually harmed consumers.
d.
To determine if providers of a good acted reasonably in engaging in a boycott.
b
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
54. In the Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. case discussed in the text, the question was whether a patented
product in a tying arrangement creates a presumption of market power in that product.
a.
The court upheld earlier law and ruled that the existence of a patent in a tying arrangement creates a
presumption of market power.
b.
The court ruled that a tying arrangements involving a patented product should be evaluated under the rule of
reason standard rather than under the per se rule.
c.
The court ruled that a tying arrangements involving a patented product should be evaluated under the per se
rule rather than under the rule of reason standard.
d.
Overturning prior law the court ruled that the matter was irrelevant because all tying arrangements are illegal
regardless of whether or not a patented product is involved.
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
Blooms: Analysis
55. __________ is the power to control prices or exclude competition in a relevant market.
a.
Horizontal price-fixing
b.
Vertical market division
c.
A tying arrangement
d.
Market power
d
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–3a Market Power
Blooms: Application
56. Which of the following is not a factor used in determining the anticompetitive effects of a horizontal merger under the
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
Blooms: Analysis
Clayton Act?
a.
The level of concentration in the market.
b.
The market shares of the firms involved in the transaction.
c.
Whether the market is structurally conducive to anticompetitive behavior.
d.
The market price of the buyer’s stock.
Fact Pattern 16-1
Patty owns and operates a gym. Her main competitor is Jason who runs another gym three streets from her. They cater to
the same clientele. Patty and Jason keep trying to undercut each other in order to attract customers. One evening Patty
sees Jason in the local coffee shop and sits down to talk with him. They discuss how difficult it is to do upgrades and
make money with the prices they are charging. Patty winked at Jason and said “You know, charging $80 per month would
enable a good profit margin.” The next day Patty started charging $80 per month as did Jason. Customers started
complaining particularly after another coffee drinker and gym customer at a table sitting at a table near Patty and Jason
made it known that they had seemed very cozy. Patty and Jason deny any agreement to set the same price for gym
membership. They avow that the decision was made by each of them independently.
57. Refer to Fact Pattern 16–1. Frank, a first year law student and gym member, is suspicious; but he does not know what
violation to claim. Which of the following is the correct term for an illegal agreement by providers of the same good or
service to charge a set fee?
a.
Horizontal price fixing
b.
Vertical price fixing
c.
Substantial price fixing
d.
Predatory price fixing
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2c Types of Horizontal Restraints
Blooms: Analysis
58. Refer to Fact Pattern 16–1. Is the fact that no express words passed between Patty and Jason a defense to charges of
antitrust violation?
a.
Yes, because direct evidence is required in order to establish an illegal agreement to fix prices.
b.
Yes, both because direct evidence is required in order to establish an illegal agreement to fix prices and
because the courts require evidence of an explicit agreement in such cases.
c.
It is a defense to charges of criminal antitrust violations, but not to civil antitrust violations.
d.
No, because a knowing wink can mean more than words.
d
d
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–5b Merger Guidelines
Blooms: Analysis
59. Molly runs the best dog grooming shop in town. All the dogs love her, as do the owners. She is particularly popular
because of a special type of dog biscuit she gives for treats that provides such energy that owners have been known to try
them too. Slowly but surely all the other dog grooming shops start to go out of business. Molly claims surprise when one
day she is charged with unlawfully monopolizing the dog grooming business. Which of the following would be her best
defense?
a.
That she primarily provided biscuits, not grooming.
b.
That she did not intentionally obtain monopoly power or retain it through anticompetitive acts.
c.
That she did not intentionally obtain monopoly power, and that it was legally acceptable for her to willfully
attempt to keep it.
d.
That services, not goods, were involved.
b
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–3b Monopolistic Intent
Blooms: Analysis
60. Happy City has three distributors of milk products. Sam, who owns a grocery store, angers one of the distributors
when he insists that additional milk be delivered on Christmas Eve. He annoys another distributor when he makes a
delivery driver wait to deliver milk. The three distributors get together and discuss the fact that they like all the other
grocers in town better than Sam. One of them has an idea that they should stop selling milk products to Sam. The milk
distributors call their friends the meat distributors and talk them into not selling meat to Sam either. Sam hears about the
plot and wants to stop it. Which of the following best describes the agreements between the distributors of milk and meat
to not sell to Sam?
a.
It would likely be a boycott.
b.
It would likely be a horizontal distribution agreement.
c.
It would likely be a vertical distribution agreement.
d.
There is no descriptive term in antitrust law since this is simply an agreement among sellers who do not
legally have to sell to any particular buyer.
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2c Types of Horizontal Restraints
Blooms: Analysis
Fact Pattern 16-2
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2c Types of Horizontal Restraints
Blooms: Analysis
Number One Oil Company sells gas to various gas stations. Number One requires that the gas stations agree that they will
not sell gas above a certain maximum price set by Number One. Some of the gas stations are unhappy with the
arrangement because they wish to sell gas at any price they choose. Unfortunately for them, other oil companies in the
region also impose maximum price restrictions. The station owners begin investigating whether any antitrust violation
could be involved.
61. Refer to Fact Pattern 16–2. Which of the following best describes the situation by which Number One Oil Company
and other companies impose maximum price restrictions?
a.
Horizontal price-fixing
b.
Vertical price-fixing
c.
Adverse price-fixing
d.
There is no antitrust term for the practice.
62. Refer to Fact Pattern 16–2. Which of the following is true regarding whether the imposition of maximum prices under
the facts presented would be an antitrust violation?
a.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that such restrictions do not violate federal antitrust law.
b.
The imposition of maximum pricing restrictions is per se illegal under federal antitrust law.
c.
A rule of reason approach is used in determining whether the imposition of maximum prices is illegal under
federal antitrust law.
d.
A presumption of reasonableness approach is used in determining whether the imposition of maximum prices
is illegal under federal antitrust law.
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraints
Blooms: Analysis
63. What must a plaintiff demonstrate for liability to attach under Section 1 of the Sherman Act?
separate entities; (2) it unreasonably restrains trade; (3) it affects interstate or foreign
commerce; and (4) it causes an antitrust injury.
1
United States – BUSBROG: – Analytic
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16-2 Agreements in Restraint of Trade: Section 1 of the Sherman Act
Blooms: Analysis
b
1
United States – BUSPROG: – ANALYTIC
DISC: – AICPA: BB-Legal
16–2d Types of Vertical Restraint
Blooms: Analyis
64. What types of price-fixing agreements are considered horizontal price-fixing?
65. What three factors does a court primarily look to in determining if a horizontal merger is permissible once the market
is defined? Discuss fully.
66. How would a plaintiff establish the existence of a tying arrangement, and under what laws may tying arrangements be
challenged?
67. Explain the purpose and scope of the Robinson-Patman Act. What factors will courts use in determining whether or
not a violation has occurred? Discuss fully.
68. Discuss the basic U.S. rule for evaluating whether monopolistic action under the Sherman Act is violated by acts
affecting U.S. imports where the anticompetitive conduct occurs offshore, but the adverse impact is felt in the United
States. When, if ever, is conflicting law between a foreign country and the U.S. a defense?
69. Set forth when a monopolist has a duty to deal with its rivals and the four elements considered in determining such a
duty.