,i  #aaith ,,congress  #b;d ,session    
,h4 ,r4 #hfcc  ,,in ,,the ,,house ,,of  
,,representatives  ,april #cj1 #bjbf,ms4
 ,scanlon 7for herself and ,mr4 ,nadler7
 introduced the following bill2 which   
was referred to the ,committee on the   
,judiciary  ,a ,,bill  ,to specify the  
standards governing claims of           
consciously parallel pricing            
coordination in civil actions under the 
,sherman ,act1 and to clarify the       
meaning of contract1 combination in the 
form of trust or otherwise1 or          
conspiracy under the ,sherman ,act4  #a4
 ,short title ,this ,act may be cited as
 the ,competitive ,prices ,act4  #b4    
,pleading an antitrust violation through
 parallel conduct and plus factors  7a7 
,definitions  7#a7 ,the term antitrust  
laws means the ,sherman ,act 7#ae       
,u4,s4,c4 #a1 et seq471 the ,clayton    
,act 7#ae ,u4,s4,c4 #ab1 et seq471 and  
the ,federal ,trade ,commission ,act    
7#ae ,u4,s4,c4 #da1 et seq474  7#b7 ,the
 term parallel conduct means two or more

 persons acting similarly to raise1     
lower1 maintain1 stabilize1 or          
manipulate price1 output1 capacity1     
supply1 or other terms of competition   
for reasonably interchangeable          
commodities or services4 ,parallel      
conduct need not be uniform and can be  
varied in timing1 method1 and amount4   
7#c7 ,the term person has the meaning   
given the term in subsection 7a7 of the 
#ast section of the ,clayton ,act 7#e   
,u4,s4,c4 #ab7;a774  7#d7 ,the term plus
 factors means allegations other than   
parallel conduct supporting the         
inference of a conspiracy1 including--  
7,a7 a motive to coordinate efforts to  
raise1 lower1 maintain1 stabilize1 or   
manipulate price1 output1 capacity1     
supply1 or other terms of competition   
for the purchase or sale of reasonably  
interchangeable commodities or services2
  7,b7 actions that would be contrary to
 a person's unilateral economic         
self-interest absent a conspiracy2  7,c7
 departure from prior pricing           

methodology and practices2  7,d7        
exchanges of competitively sensitive    
information2  7,e7 price or output      
levels unexplained by cost1 supply1 or  
demand2  7,f7 an opportunity to conspire
 at industry events1 conferences1 trade 
association activities1 or through any  
other meetings or venues2  7,g7 past    
collusive practices2  7,h7 an invitation
 to participate in a common scheme1     
including by public signaling of        
pricing1 output1 capacity1 supply1 or   
other competitive strategies1 or        
offering of a method to engage in       
parallel conduct2 and  7,i7 market      
conditions conducive to coordination1   
including high market concentration1    
high barriers to entry1 high exit       
barriers1 inelastic demand1 or fungible 
products4  7#e7 ,the terms ,state       
attorney general and ,state have the    
meaning given in section #d;,g of the   
,clayton ,act 7#ae ,u4,s4,c4 #ae;g74    
7b7 ,standards of pleading and proof ,in
 a civil action1 including an action    

brought by the ,united ,states1 the     
,federal ,trade ,commission1 a ,state   
attorney general1 or any person seeking 
damages or injunctive relief for        
violations of the antitrust laws-- 7#a7 
when opposing any motion to dismiss a   
complaint1 motion for judgment on the   
pleadings1 or any other motion          
challenging the sufficiency of the      
allegations1 a claimant--  7,a7         
plausibly states a claim by alleging    
parallel conduct and the presence of two
 or more plus factors2  7,b7 need not   
allege direct evidence of a conspiracy2 
7,c7 need not allege facts tending to   
exclude the possibility of independent  
action2 and  7,d7 need not allege a     
theory that is more plausible than one  
offered by defendants1 as the court at  
the pleading stage must only consider   
whether the allegations are plausible1  
not whether an alternative explanation  
is equally or more plausible2 and  7#b7 
when opposing any motion for summary    
judgment1 motion for directed verdict1  

motion for judgment as a matter of law1 
or any other motion challenging the     
sufficiency of the evidence and         
permitting a ruling as matter of law1 a 
claimant--  7,a7 demonstrates a genuine 
issue of material fact by offering      
evidence1 which may be direct evidence1 
circumstantial evidence1 or some        
combination of the two1 that is         
sufficient to allow a trier of fact to  
find that the defending party engaged in
 an unlawful conspiracy2  7,b7 need not 
offer evidence tending to exclude the   
possibility that the defending party    
acted independently2 and  7,c7 need not 
demonstrate that the weight of the      
evidence favors the claimant1 as all    
evidence must be construed in the light 
most favorable to the party opposing    
summary judgment and the weighing of the
 evidence is an issue for the finder of 
fact4  7c7 ,rule of construction        
,nothing in this ,act shall be construed
 to abridge or narrow the remedies      
available under the antitrust laws4