AT&T asks judge to dismiss competitors’ lawsuits over T-Mobile deal
Last week wireless carrier AT&T Inc. asked a federal judge to dismiss Sprint Nextel Corp.s and Cellular South Inc.s lawsuits alleging its proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA Inc. would be anti-competitive.
October 03, 2011 at 06:55 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Last week wireless carrier AT&T Inc. asked a federal judge to dismiss Sprint Nextel Corp.'s and Cellular South Inc.'s lawsuits alleging its proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA Inc. would be anti-competitive.
According to AT&T, Sprint and Cellular South—which are the third- and ninth-largest wireless carriers in terms of customers, respectively—failed to prove that the T-Mobile deal would hurt competition among wireless carriers. AT&T contends that the deal will enhance competition and lead to better, cheaper services for consumers.
“What is good for consumers is bad for Sprint, and that is why Sprint has filed suit,” AT&T said in its court filing in the Sprint case.
Additionally, AT&T says that Mississippi-based Cellular South, which changed its name to C Spire Wireless at the end of September, proposed an agreement to prohibit competition in Mississippi. “This inappropriate proposal confirms that what Cellular South fears is competition, not lack of competition,” AT&T said in its court filing in the Cellular South case.
Sprint and Cellular South sued AT&T on Sept. 6 and Sept. 19, respectively. The Justice Department also filed a lawsuit on Aug. 31 challenging AT&T's proposed acquisition of T-Mobile.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Apple Disputes 'Efforts to Manufacture' Imaging Sensor Claims Against iPhone 15 Technology
Coinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute read
Baker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1Not Here: Court Finds Texas Has No Jurisdiction Over Google
- 2Lawyer's Retirement Benefits Excluded From Marital Property
- 3'David and Goliath' Dispute Between Software Developers Ends in $24M Settlement
- 4Supreme Court Takes Up the Corporate Transparency Act: Recent Litigation and Potential Next Steps
- 5Brogdon: The Final Nail in Corbin’s Coffin in Premises Cases
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
