ASHTON WOODS HOLDINGS L.L.C. et al v. USG CORPORATION et al

Filing 94

MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT L&W, USG, AND USG CORP.'S MOTION FOR JOINDER (DOC. NO. 64 IN 15-CV-1712) IS GRANTED. CERTAIN DEFENDANTS' JOINT PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 65 IN 15-CV-1712) IS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT IT ASKS THIS COURT TO NARROW THE SCOPE OF THE CONSPIRACY PERIOD TO 2011 THROUGH THE 2013 PRICE INCREASE. DEFENDANT CERTAINTEED'S MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 66 IN 15-CV-1712) IS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT IT ASKS THIS COURT TO NARROW THE SCOPE OF THE CONSPIRACY P ERIOD TO 2011 THROUGH THE 2013 PRICE HIKE AND DENIED TO THE EXTENT IT ASKS THE COURT TO DISMISS THE REMAINDER OF HOMEBUILDER PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS AND DEFENDANT CONTINENTAL'S MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 375 IN 13-MD-2437) IS GRANTED, AND CONTI NENTAL IS DISMISSED FROM THE SUIT. THIS IS ONLY A PARTIAL RULING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS. THE COURT WILL ADRESS DEFENDANTS' ARGUMENTS RELATED TO HOMEBUILDER PLAINTIFFS' STATE-LAW CLAIMS AND ILLINOIS BRICK AT A LATER DATE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MICHAEL M. BAYLSON ON 6/22/2016. 6/23/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED TO LIAISON COUNSEL. (SEE PAPER # 410 IN 13-MD-2437) (ems)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: DOMESTIC DRYWALL
ANTITRUST LITIGATION
CIVIL ACTION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:

MDL No. 13-2437

Ashton Woods Holdings LLC, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

15-cv-1712

v.
USG Corp., et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
AND NOW, this 22nd day of June 2016, after review of Homebuilder Plaintiffs’ Second
Amended Complaint (ECF 56), 1 Defendants’ Joint Partial Motion to Dismiss (ECF 65),
Defendant CertainTeed’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 66), Defendant Continental’s Motion to
Dismiss (ECF 375), 2 Homebuilder Plaintiffs’ Response thereto (ECF 77), Joint Defendants’,
Continental’s, and CertainTeed’s replies thereto (ECF 81, 392, 82), and L&W, USG, and USG
Corp.’s Motion for Joinder for Certain Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss (ECF 64), it is
hereby ORDERED that:
1. L&W, USG, and USG Corp.’s Motion for Joinder (ECF 64) is
GRANTED;
2. Certain Defendants’ Joint Partial Motion to Dismiss (ECF 65)
is GRANTED to the extent it asks this Court to narrow the

1
The docket numbers correspond with the 15-cv-1712 docket rather than the MDL docket
except as noted otherwise.
2
Continental’s Motion to Dismiss and Reply were mistakenly left off of the 15-1712
docket. Thus, citations to Continental documents refer to the 13-2437 docket.

scope of the conspiracy period to 2011 through the 2013 price
increase;
3. Defendant CertainTeed’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 66) is
GRANTED to the extent it asks this Court to narrow the scope
of the conspiracy period to 2011 through the 2013 price hike
and DENIED to the extent it asks the Court to dismiss the
remainder of Homebuilder Plaintiffs’ claims; and
4. Defendant Continental’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 375) is
GRANTED, and Continental is dismissed from the suit.
This is only a partial ruling on Defendants’ Motions. The Court will address Defendants’
arguments related to Homebuilder Plaintiffs’ state-law claims and Illinois Brick at a later date.

BY THE COURT:
/s/ Michael M. Baylson
MICHAEL M. BAYLSON, U.S.D.J.
O:\13-MD-2437 - drywall\15 cv1712 Order Narrowing Scope 6.16.16.docx

2