In National Bd. for Certification in Occupational Therapy v. American Occupational Therapy Ass’n, the plaintiff and defendant were two competing certification entities in the occupational therapy field. The main focus of the suit was trademark infringement. The defendant, American Occupational (AOTA), a professional trade association, had spawned the National Board for Certification (NBCOT), which then separately re-incorporated itself a short time later. Eventually, the NBCOT wanted to implement a policy that required board applicants to disclose any illegal behavior. AOTA opposed the plan and sought to revoke NBCOT’s certification trademarks, to halt NBCOT altogether. The court resolved the issue in favor of NBCOT, but noted that AOTA’s action did not rise to the level of "boycott," as asserted by NBCOT. NBCOT also failed to produce sufficient evidence to show that AOTA had violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. The three prong test used by the court was: 1) that the [defendant] had engaged in predatory or anti-competitive conduct; 2) the defendant has a specific intent to monopolize; and 3) that the defendant has a dangerous chance of achieving monopoly power. None of the evidence asserted by NBCOT could meet this three-prong test. AOTA’s antitrust claims against NBCOT also failed for much the same reason.

<Summary>    Analysis   Full-Text   Case Index