| United States v. Continental Can Co. | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued April 28, 1964 Decided June 22, 1964 | |
| Full case name | United States v. Continental Can Co., et al. |
| Citations | 378U.S.441 (more) |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Motion to dismiss granted, 217F. Supp.761 (S.D.N.Y. 1963) |
| Holding | |
| Section 7 of the Clayton Act, which prohibits a corporation from acquiring another company when it results in a substantial reduction in competition, applies to competition between different industries for the same end user market. Southern District of New York reversed and remanded. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | White, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Clark, Brennan, Goldberg |
| Concurrence | Goldberg |
| Dissent | Harlan, joined by Stewart |
| Laws applied | |
| 15 U.S.C. § 18 (Clayton Act § 7) | |
United States v. Continental Can Co., 378 U.S. 441 (1964), was aU.S. Supreme Court case which addressedantitrust issues. One issue it addressed was how should amarket segment be defined for purposes of reviewing amerger of companies which manufacture different but related products.
In 1956,Continental Can Company, the second largest producer of metal containers in the U.S., acquired theHazel-Atlas Glass Company, the third largest producer of glass containers.
The government sought Continental Can'sdivestiture of the assets of Hazel-Atlas, arguing that the merger was a violation of Section 7 of theClayton Antitrust Act. The government claimed ten product markets existed, including the can industry, the glass container industry, and various lines of commerce defined by the end use of the containers.
TheUnited States District Court for the Southern District of New York found three product markets: metal containers, glass containers, and beer containers. The district court dismissed the case, holding that the government had failed to prove reasonable probability of lessening competition in the markets it had identified.
![[icon]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=http%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aWiki_letter_w_cropped.svg) | This sectionneeds expansion. You can help byadding missing information.(April 2013) |
Works related toUnited States v. Continental Can Co. at Wikisource | This article related to a case of theSupreme Court of the United States of theWarren Court is astub. You can help Wikipedia byadding missing information. |