to Dan Tutcher from Mark Limbaugh. 56 . After reviewing City of Chanute, the court concludes that Southern’s assertion that this is "directly on point” is overstated. In City of Chanute, defendant had granted plaintiffs access to the pipeline. Despite Southern’s assertions to the contrary in its reply brief, none of the extensive materials submitted to the court indicates that GUA could have otherwise gained access to Southerns pipeline. 57 . In footnote 4 to its reply brief, Alagasco states that GUA incorrectly stated that Alagasco rescinded its offer to lower Tuscaloosa Steel’s transportation rates. Alagasco asserts that GUA was referring to a proposal to buy gas on Tuscaloosa Steel’s behalf. 58 . Referred to as SURF negotiations. 59 . See Mr. Furniture, supra, 919 F.2d at 1520 (<HOLDING>). 60 . The elements of this claim have been set
holding that plaintiff must show antitrust injury meaning injury of the type the antitrust laws were intended to prevent and which flows from defendants unlawful acts holding that there must be a causal connection between the alleged antitrust violation and the antitrust injury for there to be antitrust standing holding that a plaintiff must show antitrust injury in order to bring an antitrust lawsuit holding that an activity which is exempt from the antitrust laws cannot form the basis of an antitrust investigation holding that an antitrust injury is a necessary element of a  2 claim