Demystifying the Common Law Doctrine Against Monopolization

B. Common Law Doctrine Against Monopolization

553. Plaintiff Commonwealth of Pennsylvania repeats and re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every paragraph and allegation of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

554. The conduct to maintain Amazon’s monopolies as set forth in the preceding counts constitutes monopolization in violation of Pennsylvania antitrust common law.

555. Amazon’s conduct in maintaining its monopolies had the following effects: (1) competition in the online superstore market and the market for online marketplace services has been restrained, suppressed and eliminated throughout Pennsylvania; (2) online superstore market prices have been raised, maintained and stabilized at artificially-high levels throughout Pennsylvania; (3) Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania consumers have been deprived of free and open markets; and (4) Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania consumers have paid supra-competitive, artificially inflated prices for online superstore products and online marketplace services.

556. The Commonwealth seeks all available equitable relief under Pennsylvania common law.