AKRON — Six major tire makers sued earlier this year over price-fixing allegations have asked a federal judge overseeing the cases to dismiss them, citing plaintiffs' failure to provide any credible evidence to support their claims.
Legal counsel for Bridgestone Americas Inc., Continental Tire the Americas Inc., Goodyear, Michelin North America Inc., Nokian Tyres P.L.C. and Pirelli Tire Corp. filed a motion Sept. 20 in federal district court in Akron, where at least three separate suits filed in other courts were consolidated earlier this summer.
The antitrust cases from consumers, automobile dealerships and other purchasers accuse the six tire companies of "artificially raising, fixing, maintaining or stabilizing the price of tires" sold in the U.S.
In their joint court filing, the tire makers called the claims "far-fetched" and said the plaintiffs had attempted to "create a conspiracy out of thin air" with no evidence substantiating the lawsuits.
The filing states the tire makers contend their pricing decisions reflected "rational and competitive behavior in a concentrated market."
The plaintiffs' claims were first made in February following revelation that the European Commission was conducting an antitrust probe of certain tire makers.
In an 87-page document filed Sept. 20 with the court, the six tire makers state:
"Six months and a collective 352 pages later, plaintiffs' amended and consolidated complaints still plead no facts to substantiate their far-fetched claims of conspiracy. There is not a single well-pleaded allegation to substantiate what defendants supposedly agreed to do.
"This pleading failure dooms plaintiffs' claims because there is no conspiracy when there is no agreement"
Further, the filing goes on:
"Plaintiffs' allegations ascribing different market characteristics to the tire industry do not suffice to create a conspiracy out of thin air. Allegations that the tire industry is a concentrated oligopoly with high barriers to entry, inelastic demand, and high interchangeability are so generic that they could apply to numerous industries.
"These allegations are all just different ways of stating that the tire market is prone to lawful parallel behavior."
Regarding the EC investigation, the filing states:
"European competition law differs from U.S. antitrust law, and the existence of an EC investigation is insufficient, as a matter of law, to infer an unlawful agreement under U.S. federal and state law.
"This is especially true here, as plaintiffs have alleged no finding of wrongdoing — just the EC's self-described 'preliminary' investigation that does not 'prejudge the outcome of the investigation.' "
Continental Tire, Nokian Tyres have filed separate motions to dismiss on their own behalf.
