US: The wins, losses in Apple’s anti-monitor venture

But according to reports, while Apple had looked to remove the monitor altogether for allegations he had overstepped his duties, the tech giant did earn some small victories as the appeals court backed the company and emphasized the monitor’s boundaries.

Reports say last week’s oral arguments saw the US Department of Justice agreeing that Bromwich had limited duties could not stretch his powers to ensure Apple employees were in compliance with antitrust law. His duties only reach so far as to hand over evidence to the DOJ of non-compliance should he come across it.

US Circuit Judge Gerald Lynch reinforced that agreement Monday in his ruling, declaring that “the monitor will conduct his activities within the bounds” of the powers agreed upon by the DOJ.

Apple had filed to have Bromwich removed from his position after US District Judge Denise Cote appointed the lawyer as part of a ruling that found Apple had colluded to fix eBooks prices.

Judge Cote denied Apple’s motion to have him removed last month.

Apple continues to fight the monitor despite Judge Lunch’s ruling, however, as the company is in the middle of appealing Judge Cote’s initial ruling that lead to Bromwich’s appointment; reports say that legal process will likely last for months. Judge Cote is set to determine the damages Apple will have to pay for the price-fixing scheme at trial next May. Plaintiffs are seeking $840 million.

Full Content: WTAQ

Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.