The antitrust trial concerning Google’s advertising technologies in Alexandria, Virginia, concluded in just three weeks.

Although the trial was expected to last four to six weeks, Judge Leonie Brinkema, who presided over the hearings, kept a brisk pace.

The court will now take an almost two-month break, reconvening on November 25 — just before Thanksgiving — to hear closing arguments.

That’s All

On Friday, Google wrapped up its defense by presenting the testimony of its last two witnesses. First up was Ryan Pauley, Chief Revenue and Growth Officer at Vox Media. The second was Brian Bumpers, Marketing Analytics Manager at Zulily, an online clothing retailer.

The government called a single rebuttal witness — Matthew Wheatland, Chief Digital Officer of DailyMail.com. Rebuttal witnesses are those summoned by the plaintiff to refute the evidence presented by the defense after it has finished its case.

What’s Next?

Now that both sides have presented their cases, it’s up to Judge Brinkema to issue a ruling. However, there are still several steps to complete before that happens.

First, by November 4, both sides must submit their revised findings of fact — legal documents outlining the key aspects of the case. Each side prepares one of these documents. Notably, Google and the U.S. Department of Justice already submitted preliminary versions of these findings weeks before the trial even began.

Judge Brinkema will then have three weeks to review the documents and, time permitting, begin drafting a preliminary ruling.

On November 25, at 10:00 AM, everyone will return to the courtroom for final arguments. The parties will likely be given much more time to make their closing statements than the 30 minutes Judge Brinkema allowed at the trial’s outset. Additionally, Judge Brinkema may ask questions during these arguments.

Judge Brinkema is expected to deliver her ruling early next year. If the ruling favors the DOJ, additional hearings will follow to determine the appropriate penalties.

A Long Road Ahead

Google will surely appeal if it loses. The company consistently appeals any ruling that goes against it.

For example, Google plans to appeal a ruling in another antitrust case brought by the DOJ earlier this year. Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google holds a monopolistic position in two markets: online search and search advertising.

The second trial, concerning search, is scheduled for April. Judge Mehta plans to determine penalties by August 2025.

Meanwhile, Google is confident of its victory in the advertising tech case. The company insists that it is under no obligation to work with competitors, and claims that the notion of "open web advertising" has never existed — a term it says was created by the DOJ to bolster its case.

On Friday, in a blog post, Lee-Ann Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, stated that ad tech remains a highly competitive business and that «header bidding is alive and well». (The DOJ may contest this assertion by Google).

«In reality, much of advertising isn’t sold on ad exchanges, and most publishers don’t use Google Ad Manager,» writes Mulholland. «Direct deals, where ad buyers and sellers bypass exchanges entirely, account for 70% of all digital ad spending».

Thus, the decision rests with Judge Brinkema. But regardless of the outcome, Google will remain under the scrutiny of antitrust regulators.

The company also faces similar accusations of abusing its dominance in the digital advertising market. These allegations have been brought forward in a separate antitrust lawsuit led by a coalition of state attorneys general, spearheaded by Texas.

The trial for that case is slated to begin early next year.