Page:United States Reports 546.pdf/389

 546US1

178

Unit: $U15

[08-22-08 15:43:12] PAGES PGT: OPIN

VOLVO TRUCKS NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. REEDERSIMCO GMC, INC. Opinion of the Court

purchase comparisons); and (3) evidence of two occasions on which Reeder bid against another Volvo dealer (head-to-head comparisons). The Court of Appeals concluded that Reeder demonstrated competitive injury under the Act because Reeder competed with favored purchasers “at the same func­ tional level . . . and within the same geographic market.” 374 F. 3d, at 709 (quoting Best Brands, 842 F. 2d, at 585). As we see it, however, selective comparisons of the kind Reeder presented do not show the injury to competition targeted by the Robinson-Patman Act. A Both the purchase-to-purchase and the offer-to-purchase comparisons fall short, for in none of the discrete instances on which Reeder relied did Reeder compete with beneﬁciar­ ies of the alleged discrimination for the same customer. Nor did Reeder even attempt to show that the compared dealers were consistently favored vis-a`-vis Reeder. Reeder simply paired occasions on which it competed with non-Volvo dealers for a sale to Customer A with instances in which other Volvo dealers competed with non-Volvo dealers for a sale to Customer B. The compared incidents were tied to no systematic study and were separated in time by as many as seven months. See 374 F. 3d, at 706, 710. We decline to permit an inference of competitive injury from evidence of such a mix-and-match, manipulable quality. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 34–35, 55. No similar risk of manipula­ tion occurs in cases kin to the chainstore paradigm. Here, there is no discrete “favored” dealer comparable to a chain­ store or a large independent department store—at least, Reeder’s evidence is insufﬁcient to support an inference of such a dealer or set of dealers. For all we know, Reeder, on occasion, might have gotten a better deal vis-a`-vis one or more of the dealers in its comparisons. See supra, at 172. Reeder may have competed with other Volvo dealers for the opportunity to bid on potential sales in a broad geo­ graphic area. At that initial stage, however, competition is