08-3187 Volume Appendix15.pdf - Medical Supply Chain

dismissed, contradicting controlling law of the US Supreme Court and the Tenth
Circuit Court of Appeals on whether all antitrust Sherman I antitrust conspirators
need to be named as defendants (the petitioner had identified each of the coconspirators
and described in detail their agreement and conduct but chose to
name only those directly injuring him in furtherance of the hospital supply cartel.
35. The Tenth Circuit panel’s opinion reflected the respondent’s
communication of disdain and admonishment contained in the respondent’s order
of dismissal.
36. The day after the Tenth Circuit panel’s decision in the petitioner’s GE case,
the US Supreme Court docketed the petitioner’s former attorney’s petition for
certiorari of the sanctions in Medical Supply I.
37. The petitioner again brought to the attention of the Tenth Circuit the
respondent’s dismissal of federal claims in Medical Supply II violation of
controlling US Supreme Court precedent and the express language of the US
Congress in granting private rights of action under the USA PATRIOT Act in
claims based on the subsequent and continuing conduct of the defendants.
38. The national interest in the issues affected by the litigation had grown. US
Senator Sam Brownback was met with protestors demonstrating against
unaffordable healthcare costs in Topeka and ultimately withdrew from the US
Presidential race despite the absence of another social conservative with
experience in the House and Senate. Both the US Senator who had chaired the US
Senate Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust Sub Committee hearing described above
13
08-3187 Medical Supply Chain vs. Neoforma Volume XV 5708