in the united states district court for the - Hoosier Racing Tire

Case 2:07-cv-01294-TFM Document 263 Filed 09/15/2009 Page 31 of 34
The Court finds and rules that, based on the summary judgment record evidence, no
reasonable factfinder could conclude that Defendant Hoosier has engaged in coercive behavior
in violation of the antitrust laws. Further, the Court finds and rules that, based on the summary
judgment record evidence, no reasonable factfinder could conclude that Hoosier and DMS have
entered into any conspiracy to restrain trade in violation of the antitrust laws.
Conclusion
As discussed at length supra, the Court finds and rules that Plaintiffs have not
demonstrated that they have sustained an antitrust injury because the summary judgment record
is devoid of any evidence which demonstrates that Plaintiffs losses were “of the type the
antitrust laws were intended to prevent” and that any injury to Plaintiffs “flows from that which
makes Defendants’ acts unlawful.” Gulfstream III, 995 F.2d at 429. Accordingly, the motions
for summary judgment filed by Defendants Hoosier Racing Tire Corp. and Dirt Motor Sports,
Inc. d/b/a/ World Racing Group will be granted. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment will be denied as moot.
An appropriate Order follows.
McVerry, J.
7
(...continued)
require submission of the evidence to a jury. See Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. at 251-
52.
31