Honeywell sells about 74% of the Auxilliary Power Units (“APUs”) used by airlines to maintain electricity, heat, etc. on jet planes when their engines are off. Honeywell also sells most replacement parts for the APUs and services the APUs. Aerotec was a competitor in the servicing of APUs. Summary judgment is affirmed against Aerotec in its antitrust suit against Honeywell. Aerotec could not show that Honeywell tied the sale of APU parts to airlines to purchase by the airlines of other parts or service from Honeywell. The fact that Honeywell placed Aerotec in a lower priority for parts than other customers did not support its tie-in claim. Aerotec also failed to show that Honeywell had illegal exclusive dealing contracts or that its service contracts with airlines were of such long duration as to unduly restrict the market. Honeywell didn’t have to offer Aerotec the same terms or parts priority as Honeywell’s airline customers, and there was no evidence Honeywell denied Aerotec essential parts, just that it gave other customers priority when parts were scarce. Aerotec’s price discrimination claim also failed because its contracts with Honeywell were significantly different from the airlines’ contracts with Honeywell on which Aerotec drew for the price comparison.
Summary judgment is affirmed in favor of defendant in antitrust suit by competitor who claimed without sufficient supporting evidence that defendant had illegal exclusive dealing contracts and that its contracts were of such long duration as to unduly restrict the market.