In the motion, the companies argue that two conclusions in last week’s summary judgment decision were legally incorrect and should be considered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit before a jury is seated. Under federal procedure, appeals are typically permitted only after a final judgment, but interlocutory appeals may be granted when a case involves significant legal questions warranting immediate review.

The request follows a public statement published on February 19 by Dan Wall, Executive Vice President of Corporate and Regulatory Affairs at Live Nation, titled “It’s Time to Move On,” in which he called on the DOJ to settle the case. The statement was later removed from the company’s website without explanation, though archived versions indicate it remained accessible on February 20.

Judge Arun Subramanian issued a summary judgment ruling on February 18 that narrowed the scope of the government’s case. The court dismissed claims that Live Nation monopolized the national concert promotion market but allowed several other allegations to proceed, including claims related to Ticketmaster’s exclusive venue contracts and the tying of access to Live Nation-owned amphitheaters to its promotion services.

Live Nation is not appealing the portions of the ruling in its favour. Instead, it is challenging two specific legal conclusions that allowed the DOJ’s remaining claims to move forward.

One of the central issues concerns how the government defined the relevant ticketing markets. The DOJ’s case focuses on what it describes as “major concert venues.” Live Nation argues that, to support a monopolization claim based on a specific customer group, the government must demonstrate that those customers are subject to distinct pricing. According to the filing, there is “zero evidence of actual price discrimination” within the alleged markets.

The company also points to a recent monopolization case brought by the Federal Trade Commission against Meta Platforms, in which another court reached a different legal conclusion on a similar issue.

Live Nation contends that clarification from the Second Circuit is necessary to resolve the disagreement. If the appeals court sides with the company on this point, it argues that the government’s monopoly claims in the ticketing markets, as well as related exclusive dealing and damages claims brought by state attorneys general, would be dismissed.

The court has not yet ruled on whether it will grant the request to pause the trial pending appeal.