Amazon and Apple have jointly petitioned a federal judge in Seattle to compel the law firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP to pay nearly $2 million in legal fees. This request follows the dismissal of a consumer antitrust lawsuit that accused the two tech giants of conspiring to limit the number of resellers for iPhones and iPads on Amazon’s platform.
The original lawsuit, filed in 2022, alleged that Amazon and Apple entered into an agreement that restricted the number of competitive resellers of Apple products on Amazon’s marketplace, thereby inflating prices. However, the case encountered significant procedural issues when the lead plaintiff, Steven Floyd, informed his attorneys in early 2024 of his desire to withdraw from the case, citing unwillingness to participate in the discovery process. Despite this, Hagens Berman continued to represent to the court that Floyd remained involved, seeking permission to amend the complaint and add new plaintiffs without disclosing Floyd’s withdrawal.
U.S. District Judge Kymberly Evanson found that Hagens Berman’s actions misled both the defendants and the court. In September 2025, she dismissed the case and ordered the firm to pay more than $223,000 in attorneys’ fees to Apple and Amazon as a sanction. The judge emphasized the importance of candor and transparency in federal proceedings, stating that the firm’s representations were inconsistent with the reality of their client’s withdrawal.
In their recent filing, Amazon is seeking approximately $1.4 million, while Apple is requesting around $540,000 to cover additional legal expenses incurred due to what they describe as Hagens Berman’s lack of transparency, which prolonged and complicated the litigation process. Both companies argue that the firm’s conduct necessitated unnecessary legal work and expenses.
Hagens Berman has denied misleading the court and has requested Judge Evanson to reconsider the dismissal. The firm contends that it acted in compliance with professional confidentiality obligations under Washington law, emphasizing its commitment to ethical conduct. Despite acknowledging that the situation could have been handled better, the firm maintains that it observed its ethical obligations throughout the case.
This development underscores the critical importance of transparency and ethical conduct in legal proceedings, particularly in complex antitrust litigation involving major corporations. The outcome of this fee dispute may have broader implications for how law firms manage client communications and procedural disclosures in class action lawsuits.