Apple slams Goodwin Procter partner's fees in e-book case
Apple has objected to the fees charged by a Goodwin Procter partner who was in October appointed by a New York court to monitor the company's competition practices. According to court papers, Goodwin white collar partner Michael Bromwich billed Apple almost $140,000 (£85,000) in the first two weeks of his instruction, which follows a ruling in July that Apple conspired with five publishers to fix e-book prices. In a stinging critique, Apple said Bromwich's "personal financial interest is for as broad and lengthy an investigation as possible", and that he had refused to propose any sort of budget.
December 02, 2013 at 07:36 AM
3 minute read
Apple has objected to the fees charged by a Goodwin Procter partner who was in October appointed by a New York court to monitor the company's competition practices.
According to court papers, Goodwin white collar partner Michael Bromwich billed Apple almost $140,000 (£85,000) in the first two weeks of his instruction, which follows a ruling in July that Apple conspired with five publishers to fix e-book prices.
In a stinging critique, Apple said Bromwich's "personal financial interest is for as broad and lengthy an investigation as possible", and that he had refused to propose any sort of budget.
The tech giant also accused Bromwich of "operating in an unfettered and inappropriate manner", "[lacking] any antitrust experience" and extending the scope of the investigation beyond the original mandate.
Apple is urging the court to drop a proposed amendment which would grant Bromwich greater monitoring powers.
"The $1,100 (£671) hourly rate he proposes for himself and the $1,025 (£625) rate for his legal support system are higher than Apple has ever encountered for any task," the company said in the objection filed last week. "He insists on adding a 15% mark-up on top of that."
The "legal support system" consists of Fried Frank antitrust head Bernard Nigro, whose appointment was also backed by the court.
Apple said Bromwich justified the 15% fee uplift because the assignment is being run through his independent consultancy firm the Bromwich Group, rather than Goodwin Procter.
Earlier this year, the Department of Justice (DoJ) described Bromwich's suggested $495 (£302) hourly rate for another project as "expensive", according to Apple.
The objection was filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher partner Theodore Boustrous, who is representing Apple alongside Gibson Dunn partners Daniel Swanson and Cynthia Richman and O'Melveny & Myers partners Howard Heiss and Edward Moss.
Bromwich, a Washington DC-based litigation partner and member of Goodwin Procter's white collar defence group, was instructed by the court to monitor Apple's competition policies, procedures and training at Apple's cost.
Independent monitors are regularly appointed by the US courts as part of settlement agreements.
In June 2010, Bromwich was appointed by President Barack Obama to reform the regulation and oversight of offshore drilling in the wake of the Deepwater oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, a position he held until the end of 2011.
Bromwich has also led numerous high-profile government and internal investigations, and served as the Inspector General of the DoJ between 1994 and 1999.
The Bromwich Group and Goodwin Procter were unavailable for comment at the time of writing.
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
© 2024 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 AllWalmart Ordered to End ‘Abusive Practices’ By Mexican Antitrust Authority
O'Melveny Secures Global Clearances as Korean Air-Asiana Merger is Finally Completed
Big Law Firms Help Vodafone-Three Merger Clear Major Competition Hurdle
Canada’s Antitrust Watchdog Sues Google For Billions Over Ad Practices
3 minute readTrending Stories
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