In an Antitrust Case Where a Plaintiff Is Challenging a Proposed

question 69

Multiple Choice

In an antitrust case where a plaintiff is challenging a proposed merger involving the defendant (who wants the merger to be approved,) which of the following is true about the likely arguments the parties will make regarding the relevant market?

• A) Any arguments are usually pointless, because relevant markets are usually clearly determined in advance.
• B) Both parties will likely argue for a narrowly-defined relevant market.
• C) The plaintiff will argue for a narrowly-defined relevant market, and the defendant will argue for a broadly-defined relevant market.
• D) The plaintiff will argue for a broadly-defined relevant market, and the defendant will argue for a narrowly-defined relevant market.
• E) Both parties will argue for a broadly-defined relevant market.

---

Definitions:

Current Liabilities

These are obligations or debts that a company is expected to pay within one year.

Current Assets

Assets that are expected to be converted into cash, sold or consumed within the next year or within the business's normal operating cycle.

Current Liabilities

Obligations of a financial nature due in a year or during the usual business cycle.

Current Assets

Assets that are expected to be converted into cash, sold, or consumed within one year or the business's operating cycle, whichever is longer.