Blog

Bulldozer Bank has a valid and perfected lien on a truck belonging to the debtor. The debtor wishes to retain the truck and cram down the secured claim in his/her Chapter 13 plan. If the court wishes to determine the value of the truck for cram down purposes, which of the following statements is the most accurate?

Tissue Factor (TF) starts ______ of _______

Thyroglobulin is synthesized by

The first step of yogurt fermentation utilizes:

The_____ is an organ with an endocrine function.

Ikea and Pottery Barn are the only competitors in the low-cost trendy furniture market.  At the beginning of 2013 Ikea announces that they will cut all prices by 25%, significantly below Pottery Barn’s prices.  As a result, Pottery Barn quickly begins to lose market share, and realizes that if Ikea does not increase their prices Pottery Barn will go out of business.  Pottery Barn brings an antitrust suit against Ikea, alleging that they are engaging in predatory pricing in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act.  What fact would be most detrimental to Pottery Barn’s case?  

Bloomingdale’s, a department store that traditionally has sold a broad range of clothing including men’s and women’s dresswear, casual clothing, shoes, outerwear, and sports clothing, has agreed to acquire Nordstrom, a department store offering a similar mix of merchandise.  The FTC believes the relevant product market should be defined as the sale of merchandise in department stores.  Bloomingdale’s and Nordstrom argue the relevant product market should be broader and include outlet stores and specialty retail stores that sell particular types of clothing such as shoes or athletic wear.  Which of the following statements, if true, BEST supports the FTC’s conclusion that department stores constitute a distinct relevant market?  

How did Maricopa limit the scope of rebuttal arguments concerning the alleged unreasonableness of horizontal restraints?  

Same facts as the previous problem.  However, now assume that Firm A and Firm B proposed to merge and form Firm AB, rather than entering into a contractual agreement.  The post-merger firm, Firm AB, makes the same arguments about post-merger efficiencies – that is, that the post-merger distribution costs will be reduced and subsequently passed on to consumers.  The plaintiff argues that again, while the cost reductions are likely in fact, any such reduction is not cognizable as a matter of relevant antitrust law.  What is the best authority for the plaintiff’s proposition?  

Which of the following cases is the BEST authority for the proposition that after a plaintiff has successfully made out its prima facie case under Clayton Act Section 7, a defendant may dispel its rebuttal burden of production with any evidence that the merger is not likely to substantially lessen competition?