The anti-poaching case rumbles on … After an antitrust class-action suit last year accused Apple, Google, Intel and Adobe of secretly agreeing not to poach staff from each other, the case appeared to be all over back in April when the parties reached a $324M settlement.
Settlements have to be signed-off by a court, however, to ensure that it is considered fair to all parties. Earlier this month, Judge Lucy Koh rejected the settlement, saying the amount should have been $380M.
Two days ago, the parties resumed settlement talks with the help of a retired judge, but it appears these are not going well: Reuters now reports that Apple and Google has asked an appeals court to overturn Judge Koh’s decision.
In a court filing late on Thursday, the companies asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overrule Koh’s decision.
Koh “committed clear legal error” and “impermissibly substituted the court’s assessment of the value of the case for that of the parties who have been litigating the case for more than three years,” they wrote.
Judge Koh had earlier said that Steve Jobs “was a, if not the, central figure in the alleged conspiracy.”
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Really?! And you blame job for this?
*jobs
I suspect Koh is referring to how it all started: http://9to5mac.com/2014/03/23/non-poaching-emails-show-jobs-was-warring-with-google-long-before-iphone-was-launched/
Oh
It seems odd to me that a judge c/would say an agreement isn’t fair when the two sides have agreed.
Maybe she is the only one who is looking out for the plaintiffs.
Yes, it’s a safeguard against naive plaintiffs agreeing to something unfair. The odd thing to me is companies the size of Apple and Google arguing about a $56M difference – that’s just pocket change to them.
Thanks Ben. Good insight. I appreciate your work.
At least the plaintiffs won’t be getting coupons!