| NEW YORK
NEW YORK Jan 24 The U.S. government on Friday
urged a federal appeals court to reject Apple Inc's
effort to oust a court-appointed monitor for its antitrust
compliance, saying the company "cannot be trusted" to do the job
on its own.
Apple has been seeking the removal of Michael Bromwich, who
was appointed in October by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in
Manhattan, three months after she found Apple liable for
conspiring with five publishers to raise e-book prices.
On Tuesday, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New
York temporarily halted Bromwich's work so a three-judge panel
could review Apple's request to halt his work, potentially for
several months, while it fully appeals whether there should be a
monitor at all.
But in a Friday filing with the 2nd Circuit, the U.S.
Department of Justice said Apple did not make the required
"strong showing" that Cote abused her discretion in requiring a
monitor for two years, or show it suffered irreparable harm.
Apple has complained that Bromwich had been conducting a
"quasi-inquisitorial, quasi-prosecutorial" investigation that
could, if unchecked, impede its ability to develop new products.
It has also objected to Bromwich's $1,100 per hour fee,
which Cupertino, California-based Apple must pay.
"Apple's complaints ... demonstrate only that the monitor is
trying to do his job," the Justice Department said. "Even if
Apple could establish that the monitor had exceeded his
authority, the proper relief at most would be disqualification
of this particular monitor."
The government added that Apple "cannot be trusted, on its
own," to develop effective antitrust compliance and training
programs, and that taxpayers should "never again have to pay for
the government to investigate Apple for antitrust violations."
Spokespeople for Apple did not immediately respond to
requests for comment.
Bromwich has denied having overreached in monitoring Apple
and said the company had been impeding his work.
The 2nd Circuit panel is expected to hear oral arguments on
Apple's request for a longer stay on Feb. 4.
The case is U.S. v. Apple Inc, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, No. 14-60.