Court Denies Apple’s Bid to Pause Google Search Case Amid Appeal

A D.C. federal court has rejected Apple’s emergency request to pause the remedies phase of the high-profile antitrust case against Google while Apple appeals a ruling that blocked its intervention in the case. U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta issued the order on Sunday, stating that Apple failed to demonstrate that its appeal is likely to succeed or that it would suffer irreparable harm without a stay.

Apple had sought to intervene in the case to defend its default search agreement with Google, which brings in approximately $20 billion per year. However, Judge Mehta ruled that Apple’s continued ability to submit post-trial filings diminishes any potential harm, and a delay in the proceedings would be against public interest.

"Preserving the status quo by granting a stay, as Apple urges, would only perpetuate this unlawful activity and is therefore contrary to the public interest," Judge Mehta stated in the order.

The Government’s Case Against Google

The antitrust case, led by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and state attorneys general, challenges Google’s dominance in general search and search advertising. Last August, Judge Mehta found that Google violated antitrust laws by securing exclusive default search agreements with companies such as Apple, Samsung, and others. These agreements allegedly helped Google maintain its monopoly in the search market.

As a remedy, the DOJ and state enforcers have proposed breaking up Google’s business, including forcing the sale of its Chrome browser. They have also called for restrictions on Google’s ability to offer search advertising revenue to companies in exchange for making Google the default search engine.

Google, on the other hand, has proposed less severe remedies, including barring default search agreements but stopping short of breaking up its business.

Apple’s Appeal and Arguments

Apple's request to intervene was denied last week, with the court ruling that the company waited too long to step in, as the case has been pending since 2020. Apple argued that the proposed remedies would not only block its existing default search deal with Google for Safari but also prohibit any similar agreements for a decade.

In its motion, Apple claimed it would suffer irreparable harm if unable to participate in the trial, citing concerns over its “freedom to contract” and “undisputed property rights.” However, the court dismissed these arguments, noting that Apple had not provided specific reasons why it needed to present evidence at trial or how its perspective differed from what had already been presented.

Judge Mehta’s order stated that Apple failed to “identify any daylight” between its preferred remedies and those already proposed by Google. Without such information, the court could not find that Apple would suffer “certain and great” harm necessary to justify a stay.

What’s Next?

Despite the court’s ruling, Apple intends to seek a stay from the D.C. Circuit once its appeal is officially docketed. The remedies phase of the case will continue as scheduled, with a trial set for April.

If the DOJ and state attorneys general succeed in securing stringent remedies, the case could have significant implications for Google’s business model and the broader tech industry. Meanwhile, Apple remains on the sidelines, permitted to submit post-trial amicus filings but unable to actively participate in the trial proceedings.

Legal Teams Involved

Apple is represented by Latham & Watkins LLP, including attorneys Alfred C. Pfeiffer Jr., Sarah M. Ray, Aaron T. Chiu, Gregory G. Garre, and Peter E. Davis.

The DOJ’s legal team includes David E. Dahlquist, Adam T. Severt, Diana A. Aguilar Aldape, Travis R. Chapman, and others from the Antitrust Division.

Google is represented by a coalition of law firms, including Williams & Connolly LLP, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC, and Ropes & Gray LLP.

The case is U.S. et al. v. Google LLC, case number 1:20-cv-03010, and Colorado et al. v. Google LLC, case number 1:20-cv-03715, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The appeal is U.S. et al. v. Google LLC, case number 25-5016, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.