# Schuylkill Energy Resources, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Company

> Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · June 2, 1997 · 113 F.3d 405

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9490278

## Case

- **Full name:** SCHUYLKILL ENERGY RESOURCES, INC., Appellant, v. PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- **Decided:** June 2, 1997
- **Citations:** 113 F.3d 405; 1997 WL 220332
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Stapleton, Mansmann, Restani, Trade, Sloviter, Becker, Greenberg, Scirica, Cowen, Nygaard, Alito, Roth, Lewis, McKee
- **Cited by:** 403 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9490278

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that “[w]hile [plaintiff] alleges in its Amended Complaint that it is [defendant’s] competitor in the retail and wholesale markets, those assertions are belied by both the remaining factual allegations and the law”
- explaining that "[w]hen reviewing a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal, [the court] must accept as true the factual allegations in the complaint and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from them”
- explaining that “[w]hen reviewing a 12(b)(6) dismissal, [the Court] must accept as true the factual allegations in the complaint and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from them”
- finding conduct did not violate antitrust laws where absent that conduct consumers would still receive the same product and the same amount of competition
- rejecting, on a motion to dismiss, factual "assertions [that were] belied by both the remaining factual allegations and the law"

## Opinion text

SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING
June 2, 1997
The petition for rehearing filed by appellant in the above entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this court and to all other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service not having voted for rehearing by the court in banc, the petition for rehearing is denied.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9490278. Public record. Not legal advice.