You have to hand it to Kansas federal judge Daniel Crabtree.  He played it completely straight in his April 7 decision rejecting the claim by Suture Express that two national medical supply distributors were guilty of illegally tying sutures to other products.

O&M and Cardinal are broad line distributors of a complete range of medical-surgical products.  In 1998 Suture Express entered the distribution market, focusing on only two categories of products: suture and endomechanical.   Its business flourished until O&M and Cardinal, separately, began negotiating contracts providing in effect that unless customers bought suture and endo products from them, the price of other products would go up.  Suture Express saw a quick decline in business.

So Suture Express sued, claiming that the defendants are engaged in illegally tying sutures to other products.  Judge Crabtree found that suture-tying is, in fact, going on but that it’s not illegal suture- tying because it doesn’t unreasonably restrain trade.  There’s plenty of competition in the marketplace, and the defendants don’t have sufficient economic power to restrain trade.

So Judge Crabtree awarded the defendants summary judgment.

The case is Suture Express v. Cardinal Health 200, No. 2:12-cv-2760 (D. Kan. 2016).