大家帮忙翻译一下吧 能翻译多少是多少 积分不多 大家帮帮忙！！！

大家帮忙翻译一下吧 能翻译多少是多少

Cendan concludes that the Court should affirm Trinko’s holding that a complaint
alleging sustained anticompetitive conduct—grounded in behavior that may
be distinctly categorized as a violation of the 1996 Act—states a cause of action for
exclusionary conduct that violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act.

Because not every violation of the TCA is a violation of
the antitrust laws, a principled approach to antitrust enforcement should permit
those complaints pleading a sustained course of anticompetitive conduct—under
either a “refusal to deal” or “essential facilities” theory of liability—to survive a
motion to dismiss for failure to state an antitrust claim

the Second Circuit held that a complaint alleging sustained anticompetitive conduct—
grounded in behavior that may be distinctly categorized as a
violation of the 1996 Act—successfully pleads exclusionary conduct
that violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act.

Because not every violation of the TCA is a violation of
the antitrust laws, a principled approach to antitrust enforcement should permit
those complaints pleading a sustained course of anticompetitive conduct—under
either a “refusal to deal” or “essential facilities” theory of liability—to survive a
motion to dismiss for failure to state an antitrust claim Because not every violation of the TCA is a violation of
the plaintiffs’ complaints satisfied the exceedingly low threshold required to survive a motion to dismiss. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address this issue and will decide this term whether the Second Circuit erred in reversing the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ antitrust claims。