International Audiotext Network, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company

Summary

The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) of International Audiotext Network's Sherman Act claims against AT&T. The court held that the essential facilities doctrine did not require AT&T to pay IAN and its competitors for promotional services, rather than provide access to a facility for which IAN was willing to pay.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to state a Sherman Act Section 2 claim because IAN sought not access to an essential facility for which it would pay, but an agreement requiring AT&T to pay IAN and competitors for advertising or promotional services; the essential facilities doctrine does not extend to that proposed arrangement.
2. The appellate court reviews a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal de novo, accepts factual allegations as true, and affirms when no set of facts could support the plaintiff's claim.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a Sherman Act monopolization or attempted-monopolization claim based on AT&T's refusal to enter into the proposed revenue-sharing arrangement.
2. Whether the complaint stated a Sherman Act Section 1 claim based on AT&T's refusal to contract with IAN while maintaining a similar arrangement with another information provider.
3. Whether the district court properly considered the agreement between AT&T and Malhotra in deciding the Rule 12(b)(6) motion because the agreement was integral to the complaint.

Disposition

affirmed