|
 In a brief order, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York
said that monitor Michael Bromwich may continue to examine Apple's
antitrust compliance policies while the company pursues a broader
appeal seeking to remove him altogether.
However, the court's order addressed some of Apple's concerns,
making it clear that there are limits to the monitor's powers.
An Apple spokesman declined to comment.
In a statement, a Department of Justice spokeswoman said the
government was pleased with the decision.
"Today's ruling makes abundantly clear that Apple must now cooperate
with the court-appointed monitor," said the spokeswoman, Gina
Talamona.
U.S. District Judge Denise Cote installed Bromwich in October, three
months after she found Apple liable for conspiring with five
publishers to raise e-book prices.
Since then, Apple has fought a losing battle to put Bromwich on ice,
complaining that he has aggressively and improperly sought
interviews with key executives and broad access to company documents
beyond the scope of his duties.
Cote rejected Apple's protests in January, saying that the company's
reaction only underscored the necessity of an external monitor.
During oral arguments before a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit
last week, lawyers for the Department of Justice agreed that
Bromwich's duties were limited to assessing Apple's compliance
policies and its efforts to disseminate those policies to its
workers effectively.
Bromwich, the government said, would not be permitted to investigate
whether Apple employees are actually complying with antitrust laws;
if he comes across any evidence of violations, he must turn it over
to Cote.
[to top of second column] |
At the time, U.S. Circuit Judge Gerald Lynch seized on that
concession as a potential compromise to assuage Apple's concerns
that Bromwich had overreached. On Monday, the court took up that
suggestion, denying Apple's request for a stay with the
understanding that "the monitor will conduct his activities within
the bounds" the government had described.
In the meantime, Apple will pursue its appeal of Cote's liability
funding and her decision to install a monitor, a process that will
likely last for months.
Bromwich declined to comment through a spokeswoman.
A trial is scheduled for May before Cote to determine how much Apple
will have to pay in damages over e-book claims brought by 33 state
attorneys general and class action attorneys representing consumers
from 16 states. The plaintiffs are seeking $840 million, according
to court documents.
The case is U.S. v. Apple, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No.
14-60.
(Reporting by Nate Raymond and Joseph
Ax; editing by Andre Grenon and Leslie Adler)
[© 2014 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2014 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
