Google has officially filed an appeal against a pivotal US federal court ruling that declared the company an illegal monopolist in the online search and search advertising markets. The original decision, handed down by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in August 2024, found that Google unlawfully maintained its dominant position through exclusionary distribution agreements, notably paying major device makers and browser developers like Apple and Mozilla to establish Google as the default search engine, thereby stifling competition. In its appeal, filed on January 16, 2026, Google is also actively seeking a temporary halt to the implementation of certain court-ordered remedies. Specifically, the company is resisting directives that compel it to share search data and provide syndication services to rival companies. Google contends that complying with these orders would pose a significant risk of exposing its trade secrets, potentially harming user privacy, and ultimately discouraging competitors from developing their own innovative products. While Judge Mehta had previously rejected more drastic measures proposed by the Department of Justice, such as forcing Google to divest its Chrome browser or Android operating system, Google is prepared to comply with other remedy aspects like limits on contract durations for preloading apps. The company maintains that its market leadership is a result of consumer preference for its superior search product, rather than anti-competitive practices, and argues the ruling overlooks the dynamic nature of the industry and intense competition, including from new AI-powered search entrants. The legal battle, which originated with a DOJ lawsuit in 2020, is now set to proceed through the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, with a decision expected later this year. The outcome holds global significance, as it could establish precedents for how major technology companies are regulated worldwide and impact competition in digital markets, including in India where Google faces its own antitrust scrutiny.