Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04525/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04525-38/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDRE FLEURY, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

RICHEMONT NORTH AMERICA, INC.,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

No. C-05-4525 EMC

ORDER RE ISSUES FOR NOVEMBER

7, 2007 HEARING

The Court held a hearing on the Settling Plaintiffs and Defendant’s joint motion for

preliminary approval on October 17, 2007. Thereafter, the Court asked for supplemental briefing

and/or evidence from all parties and set another hearing on the motion for November 7, 2007. 

Having reviewed the submissions from the parties, the Court hereby orders that they be prepared to

address the following issues:

(1) What is the relationship between Defendant and the dealers authorized to perform Cartier

watch maintenance and repair services? In particular, what is the economic relationship

between the two? Are the authorized dealers economically independent from Defendant? 

Do they have an economic relationship similar to a franchise relationship or pursuant to

which the authorized dealers pay Cartier a royalty? 

(2) Assuming that the authorized dealers are entirely economically independent, do Plaintiffs

have any case law supporting a tying claim when there are truly independent service

organizations such as the authorized dealers who can supply parts and labor? Cf. Triad

Case 3:05-cv-04525-EMC Document 189 Filed 11/05/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Systems Corp. v. Southeastern Express Co., No. C 92 1539-FMS, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

5390 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 1994).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 5, 2007

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-04525-EMC Document 189 Filed 11/05/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDRE FLEURY, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

RICHEMONT NORTH AMERICA, INC.,

Defendant.

_______________________________

____/

No. C-05-4525 EMC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the U.S. District Court, Northern

District of California. On the below date, I served a true and correct copy of the attached, by placing

said copy/copies in a postage-paid envelope addressed to the person(s) listed below, by depositing

said envelope in the U.S. Mail; or by placing said copy/copies into an inter-office delivery

receptacle located in the Office of the Clerk.

Andre Fleury

523 Fourth Street

San Rafael, CA 94901

Dated: November 5, 2007 RICHARD W. WIEKING, CLERK

By: /s/ 

Leni Doyle

Deputy Clerk

Case 3:05-cv-04525-EMC Document 189 Filed 11/05/07 Page 3 of 3