Attorney General Márquez Comments on Dismissal of Alaska Gasline Port Authority's Antitrust Lawsuit Against ExxonMobil Corporation
June 20, 2006
(Anchorage) - Attorney General David Márquez noted today that the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska has issued its decision dismissing the Gasline Port Authority's antitrust complaint in Alaska Gasline Port Authority v. ExxonMobil Corp. This decision was issued after the Court had the opportunity to consider the written briefs and oral arguments of the parties. The Court's dismissal of this action follows the dismissal of an earlier Port Authority lawsuit regarding the Point Thompson field.
"We believe that the Court's dismissal of the Port Authority's lawsuit was the correct decision," said Márquez. The Court stated that:
[b]ecause the Court concludes Plaintiff's complaint contains inadequate allegations on all four accounts, e.g., Plaintiff's ability to finance the construction of its proposed pipeline is speculative at best, its federal antitrust claims (Claims I-IV) are hereby DISMISSED.
The Court also recognized in its decision that the Alaska Legislature created the framework to be used to develop a Gas Pipeline Project and that the Port Authority lawsuit was not consistent with this framework in that it attempts "to preempt the outcome of the SGDA's legislatively prescribed process."
"In contrast, the Administration has followed the process established by the Legislature and has been working with the Producers to develop a Gas Pipeline Project that will serve the best interest's of the State," said Márquez. "The Court's decision provides further confirmation that the Governor's successful effort to negotiate a business agreement for a gas line instead of litigating was the correct course."
Márquez also notes, "This decision reaffirms our belief that the structure of the Port Authority's proposal is untenable. We believe that the signable agreement which the Governor has negotiated is the most viable approach to bringing Alaska's vast natural gas resource to market."
The state was not a party to the lawsuit.
# # #