(Reuters) – A federal judge on Friday lifted an ethics query about whether Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick can stand for a plaintiff in multidistrict antitrust litigation against Alphabet’s Google Inc and Fb Inc even though also defending the social media giant in a lawsuit introduced by the Federal Trade Fee.

U.S. District Choose P. Kevin Castel in Manhattan federal courtroom introduced up the inquiry on his personal at a listening to as component of a broader dialogue about scheduling in the MDL involving promises that Google and Facebook suppress level of competition in the industry for on the net promoting.

A lot more than a dozen lawsuits from U.S. states, tiny organizations, publishers and advertisers were transferred to the Southern District of New York in August and assigned to Castel. In the MDL, Kellogg Hansen spouse John Thorne represents the British media organization Associated Newspapers Ltd, which runs the Everyday Mail news outlet, in a situation from Google. Kellogg Hansen’s Mark Hansen is leading the protection of Facebook in the FTC’s antitrust lawsuit in Washington, D.C.

Castel explained any joint plaintiffs’ conferences wherever system is mentioned in the MDL could expose Kellogg Hansen to an ethics conflict. Castel directed the law agency to answer to him in about a week about why the agency does not face a conflict.

“It can be very unwieldy in situations in which Google and Facebook are each defendants. To have you as Facebook’s law firm sit in the place, I will not know how that would operate. But I am going to give you an chance to lay that out,” Castel stated at the hearing.

A attorney for Facebook in the MDL who attended the hearing, Kevin Orsini, co-chief of the litigation office at Cravath, Swaine & Moore, did not answer to a concept trying to find comment on Friday.

Thorne also did not respond to messages seeking remark immediately after the listening to. Thorne’s colleague Mark Hansen, a direct attorney for Facebook in the FTC lawsuit, declined to comment.

Addressing Castel at Friday’s hearing, Thorne mentioned the Everyday Mail had produced a decision to carry a scenario from Google “and that is what we are pursuing.”

Thorne claimed Kellogg Hansen was a “deeply invested” advocate for the Each day Mail. He explained the “massive legal service fees” it took to investigate and produce the Daily Mail’s lawsuit, submitted in April in Manhattan federal court docket just before the multidistrict transfer purchase was issued.

“We actually can not sit nonetheless or go on the sidelines. The Every day Mail needs the arrangement it is really acquired,” Thorne explained. “It has no declare towards Facebook.”

Thorne claimed he would strategy to step out of any plaintiffs’ approach conferences that delved into the hard work to maintain Fb liable for alleged antitrust violations.

Castel reported he was “not accusing any one of performing in negative religion right here.” He called Kellogg Hansen’s scenario “tough” and an “odd lineup.”

“I really don’t have the remedy or solution as to how you get walled off in meetings,” Castel explained.

The circumstance is In re: Google Electronic Advertising and marketing Antitrust Litigation, U.S. District Courtroom for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:21-cv-03446.

Plaintiffs’ legal professionals include things like W. Mark Lanier of the Lanier Legislation Company David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner

For Google: Eric Mahr of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer

For Facebook: Kevin Orsini of Cravath, Swaine & Moore

Read far more:

Meet the Major Legislation alum major the FTC’s lawsuit against Facebook

U.S. judicial panel moves Texas lawsuit from Google to New York

Kellogg Hansen to defend Fb in U.S. antitrust lawsuits