In an action against NASCAR and an affiliated company that owns multiple racetracks, alleging violation of federal antitrust laws by not sanctioning a Sprint Cup race at plaintiff's racetrack and preventing them from purchasing other racetracks that already host such a race, summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding two experts' reports and deposition testimonies as being unreliable under Daubert; 2) without expert testimony, plaintiff lacks the ability to define the relevant markets necessary to succeed on its claims; and 3) plaintiff cannot demonstrate that NASCAR and the affiliate are legally capable of conspiring with each other or that its failure to obtain a Sprint Cup race constitutes an antitrust injury.
Argued: July 30, 2009
Decided and Filed: December 11, 2009
Opinion by Circuit Judge Gilman
For Appellant: Charles Frederick Rule, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
For Appellee: David Boies, Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP