Google Ad Tech Antitrust Litigation: Publisher Claims Largely Survive Summary Judgment

In a September 30, 2026 Opinion and Order in In re Google Digital Advertising Antitrust Litigation, 21-md-3010 (PKC) (S.D.N.Y.), the court largely denied Google LLC and Alphabet Inc.’s summary judgment motions against Gannett Co., Inc., Daily Mail plaintiffs Associated Newspapers Ltd. and Mail Media, Inc., and a certified class of publishers that sold advertising through Google’s AdX ad exchange.

Senior U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel denied Google’s summary judgment motion against the AdX Class and denied it against Mikula Web Solutions Inc. The court granted Google summary judgment against The Progressive Inc. For Gannett and Daily Mail, the court granted Google summary judgment only on their New York General Business Law claims and otherwise denied Google’s motion.

Kehoe Law Firm’s involvement in the litigation dates to December 23, 2020, when a class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of the firm’s client, Sterling International Consulting Group (“SICG”), and others similarly situated. The complaint alleged that Google engaged in anticompetitive conduct to monopolize the publisher ad server market, resulting in artificially inflated prices for publisher ad server services and affecting the sale of digital display advertising inventory in the United States.

Publisher Antitrust Claims

The Google ad tech antitrust litigation involves claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act concerning Google’s publisher ad server and ad exchange businesses. As described in the September 30, 2026 Opinion and Order, most plaintiffs allege that Google unlawfully tied its AdX ad exchange to publishers’ use of its DoubleClick for Publishers (“DFP”) ad server and unlawfully monopolized or attempted to monopolize the relevant digital advertising technology markets.

The ruling follows an earlier decision applying issue preclusion to findings from the federal government’s antitrust case against Google. As the court explained, Google is precluded from relitigating certain findings, including that it unlawfully tied DFP and AdX in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.

Publisher Damages Remain

Although the September 30, 2026 ruling does not award damages, it allows substantial publisher damages claims to proceed. The court noted that Gannett and Daily Mail’s expert calculated alleged damages of $900,771,489 for Gannett and $599,955,198 for Daily Mail, plus interest and ongoing accrual.

For the certified AdX Class, the court stated that the class expert calculated $1.72 billion in aggregate class-wide damages through March 31, 2024, with additional damages allegedly accruing thereafter. These figures are expert damages estimates asserted by the plaintiffs, not damages awarded by the court.

AdX Publisher Class Claims Proceed

The AdX Class alleges that Google charged publishers an inflated, supracompetitive take rate as a consequence of two alleged anticompetitive product ties. The court denied Google’s summary judgment motion on the class’s “Act 1” and “Act 2” tying theories and rejected Google’s summary judgment arguments concerning the class’s damages model and statute of limitations.

The court’s ruling means those claims may proceed; it does not constitute a final determination of all remaining liability or damages issues. As the court previously emphasized, application of issue preclusion did not relieve the plaintiffs of their burden to prove antitrust injury and damages.

Other Publisher Claims

The court granted summary judgment to Google on The Progressive’s claims, but denied summary judgment on Mikula’s claims. It also granted Google summary judgment on Inform Inc.’s federal Sherman Act and Clayton Act claims and directed further briefing concerning whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Inform’s remaining Georgia-law claims.

Send us a message with questions or concerns about the antitrust litigation or contact:

John Kehoe, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 801
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, as well as ERISA and retirement plan litigation. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

Kehoe Law Firm’s class action legal services are provided on a contingency-fee basis, meaning clients are not responsible for attorneys’ fees or litigation expenses. Any request for attorneys’ fees and expenses will be subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]