Ninth Circuit Lets Antitrust Class Action vs. Align Tech Proceed
Ninth Circuit reversed summary judgment, allowing antitrust class action against Align Technology to move forward.
Why it matters: This decision could reshape antitrust enforcement and class action litigation related to refusal-to-deal claims, affecting legal strategies for corporate clients and law firms.
- On Oct. 5, 2026, Ninth Circuit reversed district court summary judgment favoring Align Technology.
- Plaintiffs allege Align terminated interoperability agreement with 3Shape to monopolize dental markets.
- The case revives refusal-to-deal antitrust claims under Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
- Docket number is 24-1703; multiple plaintiffs including dental providers and individuals sued Align.
On October 5, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's summary judgment in favor of Align Technology, Inc.. The court allowed the significant antitrust class action challenging Align's early decision to terminate a digital interoperability agreement with 3Shape to proceed.
The plaintiffs include Simon and Simon, PC, dental providers such as VIP Dental Spas, and several individuals. They accuse Align of anticompetitive conduct by ending the agreement that allowed compatibility between Align's Invisalign aligners and 3Shape's TRIOS scanner, allegations that suggest Align aimed to monopolize the dental aligner and scanner markets.
The Ninth Circuit emphasized the importance of the burden-shifting framework in Section 2 Sherman Act cases, including refusals to deal. As the court stated, "a plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of anticompetitive conduct" before defenses can apply.
This ruling overturns the district court's earlier grant of summary judgment in favor of Align, reviving the refusal-to-deal claims. It signals that courts may scrutinize early termination of interoperability agreements more closely under antitrust laws.
The case is docket number 24-1703. The decision has implications for antitrust enforcement strategies and class action procedures, especially addressing how companies structure digital agreements and respond to competitive pressures in tech-driven markets.
By the numbers:
- October 5, 2026 — Date of Ninth Circuit decision
- 24-1703 — Court docket number
- Dozens — Plaintiffs involved including law firms, dental businesses, and individuals