Westlaw Today recently highlighted an article by Lathrop GPM attorneys Theresa Nolan Breslin and Frank Sciremammano, originally published in the firm’s The Franchise Memorandum blog, titled “California Federal Court Rejects Price Discrimination Case Alleging Costco Received Better Prices and Promotional Terms on 5-Hour Energy.”
The article covers the court’s decision in U.S. Wholesale Outlet & Distrib., Inc. v. Living Essentials, LLC, where claims that Costco unfairly received better promotional terms were rejected. The court agreed the manufacturer gave Costco allowances unavailable to others, but plaintiffs failed to show evidence of competitive injury – such as lost sales or being forced to lower prices unprofitably – required under the Robinson-Patman Act.
For manufacturers and distributors, the case underscores the need for both clear promotional programs and strong evidence when addressing antitrust claims.
Read the Westlaw Today piece here [SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED]: California Federal Court Rejects Price Discrimination Case Alleging Costco Received Better Prices and Promotional Terms on 5-Hour Energy