DECISION & ORDER Before the Court are Defendants’ motions to dismiss this antitrust and commercial action. See dkt. #s 38, 40. The parties have briefed the issues and the Court has determined the decide the matter without oral argument.I. BACKGROUNDThis case involves the technology contained in televisions sold in the United States. Plaintiff Haier America Trading, LLC (“Haier”), is the American subsidiary of a Chinese electronics manufacturer which is the world’s largest manufacturer of home appliances. Complaint (“Complt.”), dkt. # 1, at16. Haier sells televisions that comply with the Advanced Television Systems Committee (“ATSC”) and MPEG-2 standards for broadcasting digitally. Id. at17. Haier sells at least eleven models in the United States that use these standards. Id.MPEG LA, LLC (“MPEG LA”), a Delaware Company, operates as a business entity administering licenses for various patents used to create “universal technical standards.” Id. at
3, 19. MPEG LA offers access to patents “‘essential’” for MPEG-2 and ATSC “data transmission standards” by offering licensing pools of patents essential to meeting the standards. Id. MPEG LA uses a “‘Many-to-Many Licensing Model’” whereby “patent holders license many patents neccessary for meeting a specified electronic standard to many licensees.’” Id. at20 (emphasis in original). Such a model, “‘maximizes creativity, usage, profitability and affordability of products’” while maximizing profits for the owners of intellectual property and makes that property available for manufacturers and end users. Id. MPEG LA thus creates “patent pools” and administers licensing agreements for them. Id. at21.Manufacturers like Haier obtain licenses for the technology in question from MPEG LA. Id. at22. The licenses cover “patents MPEG LA represents are essential to the ATSC and MPEG-2 standards.” Id. This cases arises out of licenses to use the ATSC “patent portfolio” and the MPEG-2 “patent portfolio” which Haier secured and MPEG LA administers. Id. at
