A federal court has just appointed a new monitor on Apple Inc.’s e-Book antitrust litigation case. In its Thursday opinion, the Circuit Court of Appeal, which is based in New York City, noted in its Thursday’s opinion that:
“This appeal touches upon the scope of a district court’s power under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53 to create and modify a monitorship over the objection of the monitored party; the professional and structural constraints on that monitor’s activities; and the remedy available to the monitored party when it believes that the monitor has overreached.”
It went on further to state that, “These largely procedural questions have considerable resonance,” adding, “because the fairness and integrity of the courts can be compromised by inadequate constraint on a monitor’s aggressive use of judicial power.”
Michael Bromwich, the monitor and management consultant as well as the lawyer in this case, was criticized by the three-panel judge for filing a brief, which supported the government’s position, which favored him rather than filing one that defends himself. In addition to that, the three-panel judge also noted that his expectations, initially, of Apple might have not been attainable. However, the three-panel judge did not request for his removal because they didn’t find him with any wrong doing that required his dismissal.
At the same time Apple Inc., according to a concurring opinion, is to be blamed for not making use of a procedure that was set by the court district when it comes to raising objections to the entire process instead of “silently accumulating grievances and springing them on the district court en masse.”