SEATTLE (CN) — Amazon’s attempt to dismiss an antitrust case brought by the Federal Trade Commission and 17 states proved to be only partially successful, with a federal judge dismissing only a select few state claims.
In an order released last week and unsealed Monday, U.S. District Judge John Chun ruled that Amazon must face the majority of the 20 claims the FTC and several states levied against it under the Sherman Act, the FTC Act and applicable state laws.
The FTC and the attorneys general of 17 states, sued Amazon in September 2023, accusing the online retailer of raising prices and creating monopolies by, in part, altering organic search results to show paid advertisements or Amazon’s own products and overcharging online sellers. Vermont and Puerto Rico later joined the lawsuit.
Chun found that while the claims brought under the Sherman and FTC Acts had been sufficiently stated, certain claims brought under state laws weren’t quite as developed.
The judge dismissed claims brought under New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma and Maryland’s consumer protection and antitrust laws. In Oklahoma’s case, Chun tossed the portion of the claim specifically accusing Amazon’s mission statement of being deceptive but advanced the portion regarding unfair trade practices.
The states and the commission have until the end of the month to file a second amended complaint on dismissed claims, except for the claim brought under Pennsylvania’s common law which Chun dismissed with prejudice because it “could not possibly be cured by the allegation of other facts.”
“We are pleased with the court’s decision and look forward to moving this case forward,” FTC spokesperson Doug Farrar said in a statement. “The ways Amazon illegally maintains its monopolies and the harm they cause—including suppressed competition and higher prices for shoppers and sellers—will be on full display at trial.”
The bench trial is slated for October 2026. It will focus only on Amazon’s liability under the FTC Act, Sherman Act and the relevant state laws in response to the commission’s motion to bifurcate, Chun, a Joe Biden appointee, ruled.
Amazon expressed doubt that the commission will succeed at trial.
“The ruling at this early stage requires the court to assume all facts alleged in the complaint are true. They are not,” Tim Doyle, Amazon spokesperson, said in a statement.
Doyle also accused the FTC of lacking the evidence to back its claims and of misidentifying market competitors.
“The truth is that Amazon’s practices are good for competition, consumers, and the small- and medium-sized businesses that sell in our store, while the FTC’s approach would make shopping more difficult and costly,” Doyle said.
Amazon filed a motion to dismiss the case in December, arguing the conduct being challenged is commonplace retail practices that benefit consumers.
Chun declined to dismiss the commission’s Sherman Act claims, finding that Amazon’s procompetitive justifications were “inapt at this stage.”
The Sherman Act prohibits monopolization, which the commission and states argue Amazon violated by taking control of two markets, the online superstore market and the market for online marketplace services, accusing the retailer of illegally maintaining its monopolies through “its course of anticompetitive and exclusionary conduct.”
Specifically, the commission accused Amazon of anti-discounting practices and coercing sellers who want their products to be Prime eligible into using Amazon’s “difficult and more expensive” fulfillment service.
Amazon pushed back, arguing that the commission failed to accuse it of anticompetitive practices and didn’t identify plausible anticompetitive effects, further arguing that the commission only brought claims under the FTC Act as well because its claims under the Sherman Act weren’t strong.
The FTC Act prohibits unfair methods of competition, including those that would violate the Sherman Act. Chun, however, found that since the complaints brought under the Sherman Act could stand, the same went for the claims brought under the FTC Act.
If Amazon is found liable after the bench trial, the court will set a conference to determine how to remedy the issues.