U.S. government, two airlines say open to settling merger fight

[pave driver]

You're about 0 for 5 on your inside information.

Please stop. You continue to embarrass yourself. Now please go home and do your homework and take out the trash.

 

[pave driver]

It is now the case that all info including the parties and people the DOJ talked to and all information from the previous mergers will be given to US/AA management. The media morons continue to get a lot of the details of this merger wrong. The DOJ and US/AA will settle this case if the DOJ pulls their heads out of their A$$es. If not, the DOJ will lose in court and the new AA will give up NOTHING.

 

[PGTB]

But you already said that it was leaked that they had settled, so what gives? You're talking in absolutes when that's not even possible right now. Some of us are trying to make career decisions on whether or not to make a jump in airlines from a comfortable RJ position to starting over at a mainline job.

 

[Clayton Bigby]

It is now the case that all info including the parties and people the DOJ talked to and all information from the previous mergers will be given to US/AA management. The media morons continue to get a lot of the details of this merger wrong.

Are you saying that Judge Kollar-Kotelly ruled against Levie's recommendations? Or are you saying that everyone (AP, Reuters, ect.) has reported Levie's recommendation incorrectly? In either case, care to share your source this time?

 

[RJLoser]

It is now the case that all info including the parties and people the DOJ talked to and all information from the previous mergers will be given to US/AA management. The media morons continue to get a lot of the details of this merger wrong. The DOJ and US/AA will settle this case if the DOJ pulls their heads out of their A$$es. If not, the DOJ will lose in court and the new AA will give up NOTHING.

Do you have a source for this?

 

[OState597]

Do you have a source for this?

I agree. Pave Driver, please stop posting unless you have a source.

 

[jc3]

But you already said that it was leaked that they had settled, so what gives? You're talking in absolutes when that's not even possible right now. Some of us are trying to make career decisions on whether or not to make a jump in airlines from a comfortable RJ position to starting over at a mainline job.

But Pace Driver is right either way. He is always right, even after he is proven wrong. Over and over and over again!

 

[PGTB]

I don't mind a rumor if its labeled as such.

 

[cbrown1]

But you already said that it was leaked that they had settled, so what gives? You're talking in absolutes when that's not even possible right now. Some of us are trying to make career decisions on whether or not to make a jump in airlines from a comfortable RJ position to starting over at a mainline job.

I agree, however I wouldn't turn down a job merger or no merger.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Some of us are trying to make career decisions on whether or not to make a jump in airlines from a comfortable RJ position to starting over at a mainline job.

Comfortable RJ jobs are built from mainline concessions and consequently make the mainline positions less comfortable. The goal should be to preserve the quality of the end goal, not manage expectations to accept mediocrity as success.

 

[elguapo9]

Comfortable RJ jobs are built from mainline concessions and consequently make the mainline positions less comfortable. The goal should be to preserve the quality of the end goal, not manage expectations to accept mediocrity as success.

Well said.

 

[pave driver]

The Special Master concludes that this material is protected opinion work product.

Plaintiffs have provided Defendants with the names of persons having discoverable information. Requiring Plaintiffs to also disclose the names of individuals who Plaintiffs interviewed, but found not to have discoverable information, would force Plaintiffs to disclose “which individuals [Plaintiffs’ counsel] consider more or less valuable as witnesses and how [he or she] [is] preparing for trial.”

Noting Defendants’ need to prepare, Plaintiffs represent that they have provided Defendants with the “names of individuals likely to have discoverable information and all nonparty documents and data received during Plaintiffs investigations.” (Opp. at 3). In light of the substantial discovery already provided to Defendants, Defendants have not established that the specific information Plaintiffs obtained in the third party interviews is so significant that it would justify overcoming the very strong preference for protecting work product.

See Story: http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/...ion-on-third-parties-interviewed-by-doj.html/

 

[pave driver]

Here?s the special master?s ruling on production of documents about past mergers

A brief summary of the documents at issue11 confirms that they consist largely of subjective opinions, and not merely facts.

Defendants aver that they need the information in order to defend the soundness of their own models and to rebut Plaintiffs? claim that the anticompetitive outcomes of the earlier mergers are likely to be replicated if the instant merger is approved. (See Mot. at 4, Reply at 2- 3).12 Plaintiffs, however, have offered to provide to Defendants all of the material which the other airlines provided to DOJ when DOJ considered those earlier mergers. Using this material, Defendants may complete their own analyses of the earlier mergers and may rely on those analyses defend their own analysis of the current merger and to rebut Plaintiffs? claims.

The Special Master expects that Plaintiffs, as they have represented, will provide Defendants all basic factual material, not already produced, gathered during Plaintiffs? consideration of the earlier mergers.

See Story: http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/...duction-of-documents-about-past-mergers.html/

 

[OState597]

Here?s the special master?s ruling on production of documents about past mergers

A brief summary of the documents at issue11 confirms that they consist largely of subjective opinions, and not merely facts.

Defendants aver that they need the information in order to defend the soundness of their own models and to rebut Plaintiffs? claim that the anticompetitive outcomes of the earlier mergers are likely to be replicated if the instant merger is approved. (See Mot. at 4, Reply at 2- 3).12 Plaintiffs, however, have offered to provide to Defendants all of the material which the other airlines provided to DOJ when DOJ considered those earlier mergers. Using this material, Defendants may complete their own analyses of the earlier mergers and may rely on those analyses defend their own analysis of the current merger and to rebut Plaintiffs? claims.

The Special Master expects that Plaintiffs, as they have represented, will provide Defendants all basic factual material, not already produced, gathered during Plaintiffs? consideration of the earlier mergers.

See Story: http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/...duction-of-documents-about-past-mergers.html/

Just stop....please

 

[Clayton Bigby]

Mensa must not be terribly difficult to join these days, or you're simply trolling.
Neither of these out of context quotes support your case. I won't waste your time explaining what these snippets (extracted from the middle of a 32 page document) actually mean, but here's the conclusion of Levie's recommendation filed with the court:

III. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Special Master recommends that the Court grant Defendants’ motion with respect to DOJ Doc. No. 15, and deny Defendants’ motion with respect to all of the remaining documents. The Special Master recommends that Plaintiffs be ordered to produce DOJ Doc. No. 15 no later than three calendar days after entry of the Court’s Order.

One document. The airlines won access to one additional document.

 

[jc3]

Jesus Pave Driver we all have google.

 

[Tweaker]

I am so lost.

 

[Dornier 335]

I am so lost.

Me too! Do judges usually follow the recommendations made by special masters? When will we know?

 

[dollacrackho]

Me too! Do judges usually follow the recommendations made by special masters? When will we know?

only if the special masters are master debaters.

 

[cbrown1]

Me too! Do judges usually follow the recommendations made by special masters? When will we know?

I think she will.