Sterling Merchandising, Inc v. Nestle, S.A., Payco Foods Corporation, and

Sterling Merchandising, Inc., sued Nestle Puerto Rico, Inc. (Nestle PR), and a group of Nestle corporations including Nestle, S.A., Nestle Holdings, Inc. and Payco Foods Corporation (Payco). The suit alleges various federal Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 12-27, and Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-7, antitrust violations and pendent Puerto Rico law claims stemming from Nestle PR’s 2003 merger with Payco and later activities. Payco had been both Sterling’s and Nestle PR’s competitor in the Puerto Rico ice cream distribution market.

The district court granted summary judgment on all of the federal antitrust claims on the grounds that Sterling lacked standing because its evidence failed to demonstrate, inter alia, that it had suffered a cognizable antitrust injury. See Sterling Merch., Inc. v. Nestle, S.A., 724 F. Supp. 2d 245 (D.P.R. 2010). As an alternative holding, the district court also granted summary judgment on the merits of Sterling’s antitrust causes of action. Id. The pendent claims were then dismissed. Sterling appeals. We affirm on the ground of Sterling’s lack of standing, particularly its failure to show antitrust injury.