Advertiser Plaintiffs Move Court to Appoint Administrator for Settlements
Advertiser plaintiffs in a long-running antitrust lawsuit against media companies moved the court to appoint JND Legal Administration as the settlement administrator to provide notice and settlements to members of proposed settlement classes and to approve the means and form…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
of notice, said their motion (docket 1:18-cv-06785) Friday in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago. They also seek to order defendants Tegna, Gray Media Group and Meredith to produce customer contact information. Defendants CBS, Fox, the Cox Entities and data tracking firm ShareBuilders agreed last month (see 2305300073) to a $48 million settlement with advertisers in the long-running antitrust lawsuit stemming from a 2018 DOJ investigation of ad price collusion that arose during inquiries into the failed Sinclair/Tribune deal. Under the settlement, Cox, CBS and Fox agreed to provide information and testimony that could help the advertisers as the litigation continues against broadcasters that aren’t part of the settlement, including Nexstar, Sinclair and Gray. On May 26, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlements in which plaintiffs sought certification of four settlement classes, one for each settling defendant. Plaintiffs now seek approval of the proposed notice program, expected to be directed to all putative members of the settlement classes, that will be supplemented by a media campaign, the filing said. The notice documents will contain “easy-to-read” settlement summaries and instructions on how to get more information, said the motion. Tegna, Raycom and Meredith have declined to produce customer contact information necessary to facilitate the notice program, the motion said. Their primary objection was that it was premature prior to plaintiffs’ seeking approval of settlements. With that objection now “mooted... there is no reason to delay entering an order compelling the production of this necessary information.”