Judge in Paramount-State AGs Case Still Has Questions, Schedules Hearing on Settlement Terms

Paramount’s deal with the 12 state attorneys general to settle their antitrust lawsuit over the Warner Bros. Discovery merger is not official just yet: The judge in the case has some “outstanding questions” about the settlement, which requires her approval before it takes effect.

In an order issued Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin granted the parties’ motion to vacate the hearing about Paramount’s previous motion to require the states (and the WGA) to post $1.88 billion bond to cover the company’s financial losses in the event it prevailed in court. That had been scheduled for Sept. 24. (The proposed settlements Paramount entered into with the states and the WGA makes that moot.)

However, Martinez-Olguin said in the order that the court “does not yet rule on the remainder of the motion to enter consent decree and dissolve the stipulation not to close” the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger.

“To address certain outstanding questions regarding the factual and legal underpinnings of the parties’ proposed consent decree, as well as the implementation of the proposed consent decree, the Court SETS a hearing for 11:00 a.m. PST on September 24, 2026,” the judge wrote. The hearing will take place via Zoom.

RELATED: What’s in the Paramount Settlement With States: Commitment to Not Sell Studio Lots, Additional $300M Yearly Investment in U.S. Film Production, CNN Oversight and More

Paramount declined to comment. The office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who led the states’ coalition suing Paramount and WBD over the merger, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

On Monday came the announcement of Paramount’s settlement with the 12 Democratic state attorneys general, leaving only the judge’s approval of the proposed consent decree as the last checkbox needed for the Paramount-WBD merger to close. In a memo to staff, Paramount CEO David Ellison said he expected the Warner Bros. pact to close in around two weeks.

The lawsuit from Bonta and the other AGs had alleged the combined Paramount-Warner Bros. would have excessive power in markets for wide-release and “tentpole” theatrical movies as well as basic cable. Previously, Bonta had asserted that only “structural” remedies (i.e., divestitures) would be sufficient to end the lawsuit but the resulting settlement includes no such provisions.