United States District Court, District of Columbia
Decided Date: August 9, 2013
For UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff: Jared A. Hughes, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Antitrust Division, Washington, DC.
For STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff: Mary Ellen Burns, OFFICE OF NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL, Economic Justice Division, New York, NY.
For RCN TELECOM SERVICES, LLC, Movant: Joshua M. Bobeck, LEAD ATTORNEY, BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP, Washington, DC.
For VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, d/b/a VERIZON WIRELESS, doing business as VERIZON WIRELESS, Defendants: David Earl Wheeler, LEAD ATTORNEY, VERIZON, Arlington, VA; Janet L. McDavid, LEAD ATTORNEY, HOGAN LOVELLS U.S. LLP, Washington, DC.
For COMCAST CORPORATION, Defendant: Arthur Joseph Burke, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRO HAC VICE, DAVIS, POLK & WARDWELL LLP, New York, NY; Lynn R Charytan, LEAD ATTORNEY, COMCAST CORPORATION, Federal Government Affairs, Washington, DC; Robert H. Griffen, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRO HAC VICE, VERIZON, Arlington, VA; Michael Norman Sohn, DAVIS, POLK & WARDWELL, Washington, DC.
For TIME WARNER CABLE INC., Defendant: Joseph J. Simons, LEAD ATTORNEY, Karen Berenthal, PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON, L.L.P., Washington, DC.
For COX COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Defendant: John Parker Erkmann, LEAD ATTORNEY, DOW LOHNES PLLC, Washington, DC; Robin Higdon Sangston, Atlanta, GA.
For BRIGHT HOUSE NETWORKS, LLC, Defendant: Robert G. Kidwell, LEAD ATTORNEY, MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C., Washington, DC.
ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, United States District Judge.
After following the appropriate procedures under the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. § § 16(b)-(h) (commonly known as the APPA or Tunney Act), the Government moves for entry of final judgment in this antitrust case. Mot. for Final J. [Dkt. 27]. As stated below, the motion will be granted.
In December 2011, Verizon Communications, Inc. (Verizon) and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless  entered into certain Commercial Agreements with Comcast Corporation, Time Warner Cable Inc., Bright House Networks LLC, and Cox Communications, Inc. (Cable Defendants). The Commercial Agreements allow the sale of bundled services such as Verizon Wireless services together with Cable Defendants' residential wireline voice, video, and broadband services. They also entered into a joint venture (a Joint Operating Entity or JOE) to develop integrated wireline and wireless technologies through research and development. The Government investigated and found that the Commercial Agreements would have certain anticompetitive effects in the marketplace. As a result, the Government filed this antitrust case against Verizon, Verizon Wireless, and the Cable ...