Gerlinger v. Amazon. Com, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that antitrust standing is an element of proof for damages, not a jurisdictional prerequisite
• addressing an issue of Article III injury, which was intertwined with the merits of plaintiff’s alleged antitrust violation, under summary judgment standards
• holding the district court properly dismissed a claim because the plaintiff failed to meet his burden of establishing a genuine issue of material fact as to whether he suffered an injury-in-fact in response to defendants’ motion for summary judgment
• “Lack of antitrust standing affects a plaintiff's ability to recover, but does not implicate the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.”
• “Lack of antitrust standing affects a plaintiff’s ability to recover, but does not implicate the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.”
• “Lack of antitrust standing affects a plaintiff's ability to recover, but does not implicate the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).