Third Circuit -- Caroline Behrend v. Comcast Corp

Caroline Behrend v. Comcast Corp

   Antiturust class certification survives challenge to commonality. (Harms and remedy.)

 Even in a per se claim, relevant geographic market might have to be established.

Individual households are too granular to be considered relevant markets, as statute mandates market of economic significance.

No clear error in court finding that comcast's aggregation of service providers created anticompetitive harms citywide, and that the city is therefore the relevant geographic market.

No clear error to court finding barriers to competition based on expert opinion as opposed to any on-the-ground competitive activity which suffered harm.

Hypothetical but-for economic model of market can serve to establish that the claims are reasonably susceptible of common proof.

Concur/dissent -- No compelling reason why class boundary should be coterminous with relevant geographic market, expert but/for model will be TKO'd under Daubert, so no commonality to remedy.