Google and DOJ Head Toward Final Judgment After Judge Spares Ad-Tech Business From Breakup

A deadline for both sides in the federal government's landmark ad-tech antitrust case against Google passed Wednesday without a public challenge to the confidential terms of a ruling that spared the company from being forced to sell off its advertising exchange, as the case moves toward a final judgment expected within weeks.

The deadline was the latest step in a case that reached a turning point on September 2, when U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia rejected the Justice Department's request for structural remedies against Google's advertising technology business. According to case records on the public docket for the case, Brinkema declined to order Google to divest its AdX exchange, to open-source the auction logic behind its DFP publisher ad server, or to sell off what the parties called the "DFP Remainder."

What the judge decided

Instead of a breakup, Brinkema ordered a set of behavioral changes intended to loosen Google's grip on the market. The remedies require Google to make its tools interoperable with competitors, including open-source header-bidding technology such as Prebid, and bar Google's AdWords advertising platform from bidding preferentially into AdX or other Google-owned ad tools simply because Google owns them. AdWords is also barred from bidding directly into DFP. An independent monitor and a technical committee will oversee Google's compliance for six years, the length of the final judgment, once it is entered. The ruling built on Brinkema's earlier finding, detailed in an April 2025 opinion available through the New York Attorney General's court-filings archive, that Google illegally monopolized both the publisher ad-server market and the ad-exchange market and unlawfully tied the two together.

Wednesday's deadline gave both the Justice Department and Google 14 days from the September 2 ruling to seek redactions to the memorandum opinion, which was initially filed under seal, according to legal trackers following the litigation. The case is being heard in the same Eastern District of Virginia courthouse where the court's own notices on the matter have been posted throughout the litigation. Neither side is known to have publicly objected to the substance of the order during the redaction window.

What happens next

The two sides now have until October 2 to submit a jointly proposed final judgment spelling out how the behavioral remedies will be implemented, or to flag any provisions on which they still disagree. Reaction to the September 2 ruling has continued to surface in the weeks since. Google vice president of regulatory affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland said the company was "very pleased the Court rejected the DOJ's proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow." A Justice Department spokesperson said the department was "pleased that the court ordered substantial relief" and called the outcome "one step closer to restoring competition and bringing relief for the American people in online advertising markets," while noting the department was "evaluating appropriate next steps."

Industry groups remain divided. The Computer & Communications Industry Association, whose members include Google, said in comments reported by AdExchanger that antitrust remedies should be "narrowly tailored to address specific identified harms," while publisher groups have argued the behavioral fixes do not go far enough to restore competition. Legal analysts covering the case, including reporting from TechCrunch, have said an appeal by either side remains possible once the final judgment is entered, which would extend a case that has already run more than three years since the Justice Department first filed suit.