A Virginia federal judge, Leonie M. Brinkema, made a resounding decision on Monday to maintain Paul Weiss refusal. The decision maintains Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison LLP as the spearhead in Google’s defense against the U.S. Department of Justice’s ad tech monopolization case. She ruled that there exists no conflict of interest arising from the firm’s prior representation of Yelp and a newspaper trade group in a separate antitrust matter.
Judge Brinkema delivered her ruling last week, rebuffing Yelp.com and News/Media Alliance’s contentions that the firm’s prior representation of them could lead to economic consequences down the line in the Google case.
“Paul Weiss’ role in representing Google in the ad tech litigation neither poses a direct adversarial conflict nor presents a substantial risk of limiting the firm’s representation due to its previous dealings with Yelp and NMA,” Judge Brinkema stated in her memorandum opinion filed on Monday.
Furthermore, neither Yelp nor NMA is a party to the ongoing litigation, and no liabilities will be imposed on them. The judge clarified that the focus of this action is exclusively on Google’s ad tech business, unrelated to its previous work involving Yelp and NMA, which centered on Google’s internet search technology. Notably, those former representations were led by lawyers who have since left the firm, with the exception of Daniel Crane, who is no longer involved in the ad tech litigation.
