The court should deny plaintiffs’ motion to compel Nexstar to produce any white papers sent to the DOJ in connection with the agency’s investigation into exchanges of pacing information or its investigation of the Sinclair/Tribune merger, said its opposition (docket 1:18-cv-06785) to DOJ’s discovery motion 21 Tuesday in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago. Plaintiffs “knowingly misstate the facts,” including the parties’ longstanding agreement on the scope of discovery, it said. Plaintiffs knew before they filed their motion that Nexstar didn’t submit any white papers to the DOJ in connection with the pacing investigation, but they “egregiously omit this critical fact” in their motion to “wrongly depict Nexstar as uncooperative and as withholding relevant documents,” it said. The motion is “extremely untimely” since the deadline for filing motions to compel passed nine months ago, it said. “Plaintiffs have known for years that the discovery agreement they knowingly reached with Nexstar did not capture the documents they now seek,” Nexstar said. In an effort to resolve the dispute, Nexstar produced a letter on May 11 that Tribune submitted to DOJ in 1996 explaining why the exchange of pacing information in the Los Angeles DMA did not violate the antitrust laws, it said. The parties further agreed Nexstar “would not produce its correspondence with DOJ, the search terms used with the DOJ, and custodial documents produced in connection with the merger investigation that did not hit on agreed-upon search terms,” it said. Cox, CBS and Fox agreed last month (see 2305300073) to a $48 million settlement with advertisers in a 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 will provide information and testimony that could help the advertisers as the litigation continues against broadcasters that aren’t part of the settlement, such as Nexstar, Sinclair and Gray Television. The settling defendants will provide “meaningful cooperation, which will assist Plaintiffs in the prosecution of their claims against the Non-Settling Defendants,” said local advertiser plaintiffs’ May motion for preliminary approval of settlements.
A bipartisan group of House members and Senators have reintroduced a wide-ranging bill to change antidumping and countervailing duty laws, after the bill failed to advance last year.
Music distributor DistroKid violated its fiduciary duties and its duties of “good faith and fair dealing,” alleged a Wednesday breach of contract class action (docket 1:23-cv-04776) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan. The suit also named artist Raquella “Rocky Snyda” George in a claim for “knowing and material misrepresentations” in her takedown request under section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA).
U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty granted defendants’ motion to stay (docket 3:23-cv-00381) the deadline until Friday to respond to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. et al.’s largely identical complaint against President Joe Biden and nearly 70 federal defendants pending resolution of the motion for preliminary injunction in Missouri v. Biden (docket 3:22-cv-01213). The Monday filing in U.S. District Court for Western Louisiana in Monroe also ordered the parties to file a joint status report in response to the complaint within 14 days of the court’s resolution of the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction in that First Amendment case brought by the Missouri and Louisiana attorneys general. Doughty’s April 21 order gave defendants until June 20 to respond to the preliminary injunction motion filed by plaintiffs, the order said. Kennedy and the Children’s Health Defense's (CHD) moved to consolidate their March 24 class action against Biden et al. with Missouri v. Biden, saying the defendants and facts are “substantially identical” (see 2304050007). Kennedy called the case a “First Amendment challenge to the massive, systematic efforts by the federal government to induce social media companies to censor constitutionally protected speech.” The “only difference” between the two cases, said CHD, is that the Kennedy case seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, not damages, said its March memorandum in support of consolidation. Doughty deferred a ruling on the motion to consolidate until a resolution is rendered on the pending motion for preliminary injunction in Missouri v. Biden.
The Commerce Department published notices in the Federal Register June 7 on the following AD/CV duty proceedings (any notices that announce changes to AD/CV duty rates, scope, affected firms or effective dates will be detailed in another ITT article):
The Commerce Department has published the preliminary results of its antidumping duty administrative review on welded carbon steel standard pipe and tube products from Turkey (A-489-501). In the final results of this review, Commerce may set assessment rates for subject merchandise from the companies under review entered May 2021 through April 2022.
The Commerce Department has published the preliminary results of a countervailing duty administrative review on large diameter welded pipe from South Korea (C-580-898). In the final results of this review, Commerce will set CVD assessments on entries of subject merchandise from the exporters under review entered during calendar year 2021.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices June 7 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The International Trade Commission published notices in the June 6 Federal Register on the following AD/CVD injury, Section 337 patent or other trade proceedings (any notices that warrant a more detailed summary will be in another ITT article):
The Commerce Department published notices in the Federal Register June 6 on the following AD/CV duty proceedings (any notices that announce changes to AD/CV duty rates, scope, affected firms or effective dates will be detailed in another ITT article):