Changes

*"Typically, parties with antitrust injury are either competitors, purchasers, or consumers in the relevant market." Waggoner v. Denbury Onshore, LLC, 612 F. App'x 734, 737 (5th Cir. 2015).  

*"Typically, parties with antitrust injury are either competitors, purchasers, or consumers in the relevant market." Waggoner v. Denbury Onshore, LLC, 612 F. App'x 734, 737 (5th Cir. 2015).  

In Norris v. Hearst Trust, 500 F.3d 454, 466 (5th Cir. 2007), the court held that an antitrust violation would tend to cause injury to the defendant's consumers or competitors rather than to the plaintiff, who fit in neither category. The same is true here.

*In Norris v. Hearst Trust, 500 F.3d 454, 466 (5th Cir. 2007), the court held that an antitrust violation would tend to cause injury to the defendant's consumers or competitors rather than to the plaintiff, who fit in neither category.

 

=== Decisions that support antitrust standing ==

=== Decisions that support antitrust standing ==

*Mid-Texas Commc'ns Systems, Inc. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 615 F.2d 1372, 1387 (5th Cir. 1980) (more on the issue an antitrust violation, not antitrust injury)

*Mid-Texas Commc'ns Systems, Inc. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 615 F.2d 1372, 1387 (5th Cir. 1980) (more on the issue an antitrust violation, not antitrust injury)