The plaintiffs and defendants reached a settlement in a class action lawsuit against De Beers S.A., and several related entities, and the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey approved the $295 million settlement.  The complaint alleged that De Beers fixed prices in the market for rough gem-quality diamonds by, among other things, executing output-purchase agreements with competitors, establishing a market-wide cartel to set production limits, and restricting wholesalers from reselling diamonds outside of certain geographic territories.  The first category of plaintiffs, purchasers who brought diamonds directly from De Beers, asserted violations of §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-2.  The second category of plaintiffs, those who did not purchase directly from De Beers, such as consumers and jewelry retailers, asserted claims under state antitrust, consumer protection, and unjust enrichment laws of all fifty states and the District of Columbia.  The second category of plaintiffs could only rely on state law as a route to monetary relief because they lack standing to bring a federal antitrust claim for damages under  the Clayton Act.  Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720, 735-36.  Some states, like Oregon, have passed statutes called Illinois Brick repealers, which allow indirect purchasers to assert antitrust claims under state law. Continue reading “$295 million class action antitrust settlement vacated”