2

I encountered this sentence while translating a lawsuit and now I'm quite confused about what it intends to say:

Court stated the reach of the per se rule against tie-ins under 1 of the Sherman Act as extending to all defendants with "sufficient economic power with respect to the tying product to appreciably restrain free competition in the market for the tied product . . . ." (Source: https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/US/433/433.US.36.76-15.html)

I know that this is a legal issue, maybe some of you don't understand the sentence totally, so I'm not going to ask about the meaning of the whole sentence, I'm asking about the meaning of this structure: "state the reach of ....against ....as extending to...." . I'm totally not sure what it means (especially, I'm not sure what "as extending ..." means in this context)

I need you help badly.

And please reword your answer into plain english because I'm neither a native speaker nor living in any english-speaking country.

Thank you.

  • 1
    ‘Against’ is not part of this structure, I think. ‘The per se rule against tie-ins’ is a noun phrase in itself. I think we could paraphrase this as ‘the court stated that [the per se rule] extends to all defendants [etc.], based on section 1 of the Sherman Act.’ Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. – neubau May 4 '14 at 0:16
1

Court stated the reach of the per se rule ...

The Court declared how far the rule extends - what matters it does and does apply to.

... the per se rule against tie-ins under 1 of the Sherman Act ...

The specific rule whose reach the Court was talking about was the per se rule (in section 1 of the Sherman Act) forbidding tie-ins (whatever those are).

... as extending to all defendants with &c ...

This is an object complement of the verb declared: the reach of the rule is stated to extend as far as defendants of the sort described: these defendants are, by the Court's declaration subject to the rule.

So:

Court stated that the rule forbidding tie-ins is broad enough to apply to all defendants who have "sufficient economic power", &c.

DISCLAIMER:
I'm not an attorney; but in my depraved youth I spent three years translating attorneys' pleadings and an arbitrator's opinions into intelligible English, so I'm fairly confident that this is accurate.

  • Thank you, I now understand the sentence, but, as far as I know, an "object complement" must belong to one of these sorts: noun, pronoun, adjective, so I wonder which "as extending to all ..." belongs. – Thien Toan Nguyen May 4 '14 at 0:59
  • @ThienToanNguyen With some verbs an object complement--a complement which describes the verb's object--must be introduced by a preposition phrase, as in "took him [for an idiot]" or "regarded him [as capable of anything]." Here as introduces the participle phrase extending to all.... – StoneyB May 4 '14 at 1:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.