Google wins dismissal of US consumer lawsuit over mobile search
By Mike Scarcella
Aug 12 (Reuters) -A federal judge in California has dismissed a lawsuit accusing Google of unlawfully dominating web search on smartphones, but said the consumers should get another chance after a Washington, D.C. court separately ruled the tech giant spent billions to create an illegal monopoly.
U.S. District Judge Rita Lin in San Francisco on Friday dismissed the consumers' antitrust lawsuit against Google, finding they had not provided enough factual evidence showing any harm from the Alphabet unit's market dominance.
Lin said the plaintiffs could file an amended lawsuit, citing the D.C. court’s blockbuster Aug. 6 ruling that found Google's exclusive contracts with Apple and other companies helped it create an illegal monopoly over search engines.
“Although these findings were made in another litigation involving different issues, they indicate that plaintiffs may be able to plausibly allege facts about consumer harm from the alleged anticompetitive effects of Google’s default agreements,” Lin wrote in her order.
Google and attorneys for the consumers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The consumers first filed their case in 2022, accusing Google of unlawfully scheming with Apple to make Google the exclusive preloaded default search engine on the iPhone maker’s devices.
Lin dismissed an earlier version of the case based on a lack of facts. In her latest ruling, she again faulted the plaintiffs for making “conclusory” and “speculative” assertions.
“Although plaintiffs add more words to their recitation of potential harms to consumer choice, innovation, and search quality, they do not add the necessary factual allegations,” Lin wrote.
Still, the ruling could give the consumer plaintiffs some hope. Lin’s order pointed several times to aspects of U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta’s decision last week against Google in Washington.
After a weeks-long non-jury trial, Mehta concluded Google’s billions in payments to Apple and other tech companies to be the default search engine violated antitrust law.
Google has denied the allegations in both cases, and it said it would appeal Mehta’s order.
Lin set a Sept. 9 deadline for the consumers to file an amended complaint.
The case is Arcell v. Google LLC, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 22-cv-02499-RFL.
For plaintiffs: Joseph Alioto of Alioto Law Firm, and Lawrence Papale of Law Office of Lawrence Papale
For Google: John Schmidtlein and Carol Pruski of Williams & Connolly
Read more:
In landmark Google ruling, a warning to companies about preserving evidence
Google monopoly ruling could help Apple defense in antitrust case
Google has an illegal monopoly on search, US judge finds
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
Mga Kaugnay na Asset
Pinakabagong Balita
Disclaimer: Ang mga kabilang sa XM Group ay nagbibigay lang ng serbisyo sa pagpapatupad at pag-access sa aming Online Trading Facility, kung saan pinapahintulutan nito ang pagtingin at/o paggamit sa nilalaman na makikita sa website o sa pamamagitan nito, at walang layuning palitan o palawigin ito, at hindi din ito papalitan o papalawigin. Ang naturang pag-access at paggamit ay palaging alinsunod sa: (i) Mga Tuntunin at Kundisyon; (ii) Mga Babala sa Risk; at (iii) Kabuuang Disclaimer. Kaya naman ang naturang nilalaman ay ituturing na pangkalahatang impormasyon lamang. Mangyaring isaalang-alang na ang mga nilalaman ng aming Online Trading Facility ay hindi paglikom, o alok, para magsagawa ng anumang transaksyon sa mga pinansyal na market. Ang pag-trade sa alinmang pinansyal na market ay nagtataglay ng mataas na lebel ng risk sa iyong kapital.
Lahat ng materyales na nakalathala sa aming Online Trading Facility ay nakalaan para sa layuning edukasyonal/pang-impormasyon lamang at hindi naglalaman – at hindi dapat ituring bilang naglalaman – ng payo at rekomendasyon na pangpinansyal, tungkol sa buwis sa pag-i-invest, o pang-trade, o tala ng aming presyo sa pag-trade, o alok para sa, o paglikom ng, transaksyon sa alinmang pinansyal na instrument o hindi ginustong pinansyal na promosyon.
Sa anumang nilalaman na galing sa ikatlong partido, pati na ang mga nilalaman na inihanda ng XM, ang mga naturang opinyon, balita, pananaliksik, pag-analisa, presyo, ibang impormasyon o link sa ibang mga site na makikita sa website na ito ay ibibigay tulad ng nandoon, bilang pangkalahatang komentaryo sa market at hindi ito nagtataglay ng payo sa pag-i-invest. Kung ang alinmang nilalaman nito ay itinuring bilang pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, kailangan mong isaalang-alang at tanggapin na hindi ito inilaan at inihanda alinsunod sa mga legal na pangangailangan na idinisenyo para maisulong ang pagsasarili ng pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, at dahil dito ituturing ito na komunikasyon sa marketing sa ilalim ng mga kaugnay na batas at regulasyon. Mangyaring siguruhin na nabasa at naintindihan mo ang aming Notipikasyon sa Hindi Independyenteng Pananaliksik sa Pag-i-invest at Babala sa Risk na may kinalaman sa impormasyong nakalagay sa itaas, na maa-access dito.
