Google has to dismiss most of introduced ahead by a gaggle of state attorneys common. It has requested {that a} federal court docket dismiss 4 of the six fees with prejudice, which might forestall them from being introduced again to the identical court docket.

“The complaint misrepresents our business, products and motives, and we are moving to dismiss it based on its failure to offer plausible antitrust claims,” Adam Cohen, Google’s director of financial coverage, . The firm says the plaintiffs failed to supply proof of wrongdoing for a number of of their allegations and that a lot of the go well with “is based on outdated information that bears no correlation to our current products or business in this dynamic industry (and in any event never amounted to a violation of antitrust laws).”

The AGs, who’re led by Texas AG Ken Paxton, claimed Google abused its energy to shore up its place within the on-line adverts market. They mentioned the corporate that gave Facebook father or mother Meta a lift in advert header bidding (a sort of tech permits publishers to solicit bids from a number of advert exchanges concurrently) in alternate for help for Google’s Open Bidding methodology of promoting adverts.

Google mentioned the deal was above board and that it wasn’t a secret, as Facebook Audience Network (FAN) was one of several partners for its Open Bidding program. Cohen mentioned the deal “does not provide FAN with an advantage in the Open Bidding auction. FAN competes in the auction just like other bidders: FAN must make the highest bid to win a given impression, period. If another eligible network or exchange bids higher, they win the auction.”

The AGs additionally that Google harnessed not less than three packages to govern advert auctions. The intention, in keeping with the states, was to push publishers and advertisers into utilizing the corporate’s personal instruments.

“State Plaintiffs respond to Google’s success by seeking to compel Google to share with its competitors the fruits of its investments and innovation,” Google wrote in its submitting. “They criticize Google for not designing its products to better suit its rivals’ needs and for making improvements to those products that leave its competitors too far behind. They see the ‘solution’ to Google’s success as holding Google back, rather than letting market forces urge its competitors forward.”

As notes, the 2 different fees within the go well with are primarily based on state legislation and have been stayed in September. Although Google hasn’t requested for these to be dismissed, it reserved the best to make that request at a later date.