The United States Supreme Court has held that the inference of a reasonable possibility of competitive injury required by section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act is permissible in the absence of large buyer preference and seller predation, and section 2(b) of the act neither distinguishes between meeting competition to retain a customer and meeting competition to gain new customers nor requires a seller to set its lower prices on a customer-by-customer basis.
Falls City Industries, Inc. v. Vanco Beverage, Inc., 103 S. Ct. 1282 (1983).
Marnie M. Crouch,
Antitrust Laws - Robinson-Patman Act - Harm to Competition Meeting Competition Defense,
Duq. L. Rev.
Available at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr/vol22/iss1/8