A group of US state AGs requested a hold separate motion to block/pause further integration while court reviews the deal. Hearing scheduled for early Jan. What would this mean considering how far the integration already is?
17 replies (most recent on top)
@208 A most amusing remedy would be if they had to pay Cisco via some "competition fund". Because c'mon, we know who's really driving this esp. at the state level. Cisco is a true giant with levers to pull all over the place...and the biggest in SWEP/SLED contracts.
IMHO, political career-focused AGs like the ones involved don't get that much yank from being involved in this. Average Joe regardless of party couldn't care less about enterprise networking. If they know the name Cisco it's from those old desk phones, and Juniper is a kind of sharp-needled pine tree.
@1x5 This is the correct take. The Remedy, if there is even one, won't be undoing the merger. That's far too extreme. Judges know this would never survive appeal even if they were inclined to go that route (which since this judge went ahead and allowed it happen is not so inclined).
@1kd Juniper Networks no longer exists. There is no Juniper to be in limbo. HPE is now counting that revenue and paying those employees. Not to mention paying all the stockholders. You can't ctrl z all that. Maybe the court could force HPE to sell "Juniper" network business going forward but that would be the start of banana republic US legal system.
@1kd As much as I don't like this acquistion, its hopeless to assume that we will go back to being separate companies.
@1mm Ummm, yea, orange jumpsuits DO NOT go with Hermes belts.
@1m4 What if they've, I dunno, committed a crime?
@1kd I honestly just don't want to see anyone go to jail.
Dec 16th is coming soon. This is the day we will know what's happening, not Dec 8.
The most likely outcome is Judge Pitts will grant a hold-separate order.
Allowing the states to intervene is the signal. Allowing that to happen is extremely rare to begin with and almost unprecedented in modern Tunney Act cases.
Judge Casey Pitts is a Article III judge who cannot be influenced, fired or threatened. He can act own his own and doesn't answer to the President or the DOJ. The worst that can happen is an appeal which would take 12-18 months to process.
Did you know he can still reject the entire merger?
Did you know he can essentially put the DoJ on trial?
Did you know they can also subpoena every bit of emails, text, communications of every single HPE/Juniper employee or C-Level involved with the integration and merger?
Did you know Juniper can be stuck in limbo during all of this?
"The states have alleged that the DOJ’s settlement was influenced by “back-room lobbying..." Of course it was. What deal is not? Why else are property values around DC up 20% and now averaging $3.5 million for an ordinary house in a decent neighborhood. Lawyer and lobby money, and your tax dollars at work. Few if any politicians now are in it for the civic good. The job requirements are pretty low and it's easy to fake it til you make it.
So, this revisit? Duh! The game goes on. Cisco continues to lobby everyone they know. Stink things up and keep uncertainty in the air, during which time they can win a few more deals and govt. contracts.
They just try to block anything that happens under Trump's watch. The Dems will likely win in 2028, and tear down the White House ballroom that was just built. The US is in trouble with the spiteful back and forth.
@f8 As big as ATT? Don’t we all wish.
The ultimate decision will come from Judge Casey Pitts. The current admin and Bondi have no say or sway in how he rules and there is enough proof that admin aligned lobbying influenced the DOJ.
This will be as big at the original 1980-82 AT&T antitrust case.
More money for the lawyers that will ultimately mean nothing. Best not waste time worrying about this. Guessing it’ll be years before it’s resolved IF the judge decides there needs to be further concessions.
Even though the integration has progressed past the point of reversal, there is a significant likelihood that either Aruba or MIST might need to be divested (neither of which would make any sense from a deal perspective). The final decision lies with the Judge.
Will anyone go to jail? nTonio?
Rami and everyone who supported this deal should be removed. HPE should be set free from the $800 penalty clause agreement, allowing Juniper to rebuild under new leadership. With a refreshed executive team and strong C-level talent, Juniper can regain momentum and restore real competition in the industry.
On November 18, 2025, a U.S. federal judge ruled that a group of U.S. states can intervene in the legal review of HPE’s acquisition of Juniper — under that country’s antitrust oversight law, the Tunney Act.
This means the states — led by several state Attorneys General (AGs), including the state of California — now have the right to participate directly in court proceedings. They can challenge the settlement that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) reached approving the merger and scrutinize how the deal was approved.
California DOJ Attorney General
The states have alleged that the DOJ’s settlement was influenced by “back-room lobbying” and that the agreement did not adequately address antitrust concerns — for example, potential market concentration or loss of competition in enterprise networking.
California DOJ Attorney General