A motion by Apple to halt the operations of a court-appointed antitrust monitor has been rejected, the Wall Street Journal reports. The lawyer, Michael Bromwich, was appointed by the court to ensure the compliance Apple’s iBook platform with antitrust laws. Apple previously petitioned the court to have Bromwich removed from his post, believing that his $1,100/hour legal fees were leading him to take undue investigative steps solely for the purpose of overcharging the Cupertino company.

Bromwich was temporarily taken off of Apple’s case, but subsequently returned to continue his duties. Apple then accused Bromwich of going beyond his legal authority and requested once again that he be removed from the company’s case. Today the court ruled that Apple’s request would have resulted in Bromwich being unable to execute his legal duties, and thus rejected the injunction.

The full ruling is embedded below:

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

7 Responses to “Apple’s request to remove court-appointed ebooks antitrust monitor rejected”

  1. sardonick says:

    Lawyers. The reason “Fraud, waste, and abuse” was coined in a government setting.


  2. You know Apple, if you guys didn’t breach fair-trade laws in the first place, none of this would have happened. So glad the courts of law adhere to the law and not pockets of money :)


  3. gusgazzler says:

    In North Korea, when you run afoul of the government, you’re sentenced to being attacked by wild dogs. In America, we’re rather more civilized. And we make you pay for the “dogs.”