*1 Case 1:23-cv-00108-LMB-JFA Document 1754 Filed 09/19/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID#
111456 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., )
) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) l:23-cv-108 (LMB/JFA) V. ) GOOGLE LLC, )
) Defendant. ) ORDER For the reasons stated in open court, Google’s Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence Protected by Federal Rule of Evidence 408 [Dkt. No. 1578] is GRANTED for documents shovm to regulators during settlement offers or during negotiations and DENIED in all other respects; Google’s Motion to Exclude Opinion Testimony of Dr. Goranka Bjedov [Dkt. No. 1580] is DENIED; non-party Open Markets Institute’s Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae [Dkt. No. 1723] is DENIED; plaintiffs’ unopposed Motion to Amend/Correct Exhibit List [Dkt. No. 1730] is GRANTED; non-party Meta’s Motion to Seal [Dkt. No. 1636] is DENIED as to its request that the courtroom be sealed during Dr. Bjedov’s testimony; and the parties’ Joint Motion to Modify the Order Regarding Pretrial Schedule and Procedures [Dkt. No. 1566] is DENIED as moot. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that all testimony at trial be presented live, either physically or through live video, and that accordingly, subpoenas for attendance of witnesses at trial shall be served not later than seven (7) days before the date witness is to testify; and it is further *2 Case 1:23-cv-00108-LMB-JFA Document 1754 Filed 09/19/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID#
111457 ORDERED that the Parties propose a schedule to the Court for post-trial briefing and I closing arguments.
The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this Order to counsel of record. Entered this n day of September, 2025.
Alexandria, Virginia
/s/ Lconic M. Brinkema United States District Judge ! Google’s Motion to Seal Certain Confidential Documents and Testimony Proposed for Use at Trial [Dkt. No. 1633], Google’s Motion to Seal [Dkt. No. 1710], Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal Portions of Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Google’s Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Dr. Goranka Bjedov and Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Google’s Motion In Limine to Exclude Evidence of Google’s Analysis of Remedy Feasibility, and Related Exhibits [Dkt. No. 1667], and non-party Meta’s Motion to Seal [Dkt. No. 1736] will be resolved in a separate order.
2