Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum
US Airways’ April 2011 suit charged Sabre’s entry into horizontal and vertical trade restraints violating Sherman Act §1. Citing AEP Energy Servs. Gas Holding v. Bank of Am. and Gucci Am. v. Exclusive Imports Int’l, the court denied Sabre’s Jan. 18, 2013, motion to add a counterclaim, also under Sherman Act §1, alleging US Airways’ collusion with other airlines and entities to restrict Sabre’s access to airline tickets, assigned seats and baggage fees, and other "content" offered to travel agents. Although discovery is not complete, depositions have begun and document discovery is at an advanced stage. Even assuming Sabre’s delay in seeking amendment was justifiable, allowing Sabre to add a counterclaim would prejudice US Airways by necessitating new discovery and complicating trial. Sabre conceded it would take more depositions. Further, US Airways represented that it would seek discovery from many other airlines and entities so as to defendant it self at trial. The court also found Sabre’s assertion that its proposed counterclaim was just an extension of its defense against US Airways to be an exaggeration. US Airways’ relations with other airlines have only a tangential bearing on whether Sabre’s actions were anti-competitive.
