On April 17, a group of five state attorneys general (AG) and Google filed briefs defending the proposed $700 million settlement agreement reached in three antitrust suits[1] brought against Google.

The proposed parens patriae settlement, originally reached in December 2023, earmarks roughly $515 million to settle the claims of 127 million consumer class members, providing an average consumer award of $4.41. An additional $70 million of the settlement fund will be paid to the states. Under the terms of the proposed agreement, Google will be required to make several changes to its Play Store, which will make it easier for consumers to install Android apps from other app store interfaces. If accepted, the agreement will also release Google from a limited set of antitrust, unfair competition, or consumer protection claims, and common or equitable law claims for a seven-year period. Importantly, the limited release does not include any consumer claims arising out of a different factual predicate, nor does it apply to consumers who first purchased an app from Google Play or first made an in-app purchase through Google Play Billing after September 30, 2023 — even if they seek to bring a claim arising out of the same factual predicate.

In February, the proposed agreement was met with intense criticism by a Judge James Donato, a federal district court judge in the Northern District of California, who expressed concern over the agreement’s seven-year claim release period. In the hearing, Judge Donato stated, “I have to say that I find that seven-year part to be particularly concerning. I have never granted prospective relief. I don’t think that’s fair to the class.” He also expressed concerns about the adequacy of the sums individual consumers would receive if the deal was approved.

In response, both the state AGs and Google filed briefs in support of the proposed agreement. In their brief, the states touted the proposed settlement as “fair, reasonable, and adequate,” noting that the decision to release certain claims prospectively is “wholly consistent with binding precedent in th[e] circuit” and will not impact claims brought by consumers “arising out of a different factual predicate” or to those consumers who made Google Play purchases after September 2023. The state AGs’ brief also argued that the distribution plan was reasonable given the “relatively small spend on the Play Store” made by a majority of consumer class members. Google’s brief focused on the remedial provisions in the proposed settlement, which not only prohibit Google from reengaging in the conduct challenged by the lawsuits, but also require the company “to take affirmative steps” to address the alleged anticompetitive conduct.

If approved, the settlement agreement would resolve litigation that has been ongoing since 2021, which challenged Google’s practice of charging a 30% commission on Google Play Store purchases and accused the company of stifling competition by requiring consumers to use its Google Play billing platform.

[1] The three antitrust cases brought against Google are, In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litig., No. 3:21-md-2981 (N.D. Cal.); State of Utah el al. v. Google LLC et al., No. 3:21-cv-05227 (N.D. Cal.); and In re Google Play Consumer Antitrust Litig., No. 3:20-cv-05761 (N.D. Cal.).

Troutman Pepper State Attorneys General Team

	Ashley Taylor – Co-leader and Firm Vice Chair Ashley is co-leader of the firm’s nationally ranked State Attorneys General practice, vice chair of the firm, and a partner in its Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group. He helps his clients navigate the complexities involved with multistate attorneys general investigations and enforcement actions, federal agency actions, and accompanying litigation.
	Clay Friedman – Co-leader Clayton is a partner in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group and co-leader of the State Attorneys General practice, multidisciplinary teams with decades of experience crafting effective strategies to help deter or mitigate the risk of enforcement actions and litigation.
	Judy Jagdmann Judy is a partner in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy and Enforcement (RISE) practice, based in the Richmond office. She brings experience serving as chair and commissioner of the Virginia State Corporate Commission (VSCC) from 2006 through 2022, which includes regulating the utilities, insurance, banking, and securities industries. She also served as Virginia’s attorney general from 2005-2006.
	Stephen Piepgrass Stephen leads the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group. He focuses his practice on enforcement actions, investigations, and litigation. Stephen primarily represents clients engaging with, or being investigated by, state attorneys general and other state or local governmental enforcement bodies, including the CFPB and FTC, as well as clients involved with litigation, with a particular focus on heavily regulated industries.
	Avi Schick A former deputy attorney general of New York, Avi applies his experience in bet-the-company matters, representing clients in criminal and civil investigations and enforcement actions before state and federal regulators, prosecutors and enforcement agencies.
	Michael Yaghi Michael is a partner in the firm’s State Attorneys General and Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Groups, nationwide teams that advise clients on consumer protection enforcement matters and other regulatory issues.
	Samuel E. “Gene” Fishel Gene is a member of the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) practice, based in the Richmond office. He brings extensive regulatory experience, having most recently served as senior assistant attorney general and chief of the Computer Crime Section in the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, and as special assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia for 20 years.
	Tim Bado Tim is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group, where he represents corporations and individuals facing potential civil and criminal exposure. Tim’s experience in government investigations, enforcement actions, and white-collar litigation spans a number of industries, including financial services, pharmaceutical, health care, and government contracting, among others.
	Chris Carlson Chris Carlson represents clients in regulatory, civil and criminal investigations and litigation. In his practice, Chris regularly employs his prior regulatory experience to benefit clients who are interacting with and being investigated by state attorneys general.
	Natalia Jacobo Natalia is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy and Enforcement (RISE) practice. She focuses her practice on two primary areas: government contracting and state attorney general work.
	Namrata Kang Namrata (Nam) is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group, based in the Washington, D.C. office. She routinely advises clients on a wide variety of state and federal regulatory matters, with a particular emphasis on state consumer protection laws relating to consumer financial services and marketing and advertising.
	Michael Lafleur Michael is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy, and Enforcement Practice Group. Based out of the firm’s Boston office, Mike has deep experience in litigation, investigations, and other regulatory matters involving state-level regulators and state attorneys general.
	Susan Nikdel Susan is an associate in the firm’s Consumer Financial Services Practice Group, and focuses her practice on consumer financial services matters. She has defended several of the nation’s largest and most influential financial institutions in individual and class action litigation involving the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and other consumer privacy statutes.
	John Sample John is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group. He focuses his practice on a wide range of general and complex litigation matters, including shareholder disputes, fraud, products liability, breach of contract, and Biometric Information Privacy Act claims.
	Whitney Shephard Whitney is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group. She represents clients facing state and federal regulatory investigations and enforcement actions, as well as related civil litigation.
	Trey Smith Trey is an associate in the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement Practice. He focuses his practice on helping financial institutions and consumer facing companies navigate regulatory investigations and resulting litigation.
	Daniel Waltz Daniel is a member of the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement (RISE) Practice Group and State Attorneys General team. He counsels clients in connection with navigating complex government investigations, regulatory compliance, and transactions, involving state and federal government contracting obligations. Drawing on his broad experience as a former assistant attorney general for the state of Illinois, Daniel is a problem solver both inside and outside the courtroom.
	Stephanie Kozol Stephanie is Troutman Pepper’s senior government relations manager in the state attorneys general department.