The D.C. federal district court (Judge James Boasberg) ruled on Nov. 18, 2025 that the FTC failed to prove Meta unlawfully monopolized the U.S. market for “personal social networking” services. The court concluded the FTC did not establish that Meta currently possessed monopoly power and rejected the agency’s claim that its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions unlawfully preserved a monopoly.
The FTC alleged that Meta unlawfully maintained a monopoly in personal social‑networking services by using anticompetitive conduct — principally by acquiring competitive threats (Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014) to buy out rivals and preserve its dominance.
The FTC sought structural relief to remedy the alleged monopoly — principally to unwind the Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions (divestiture of those businesses) and related injunctive relief to prevent recurrence of the allegedly unlawful conduct.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reviews the district courts legal rulings and (to a lesser degree) factual findings for errors: it does not retry the case but examines the trial record and legal issues; it can affirm, reverse, vacate, remand, or modify the district courts decision.
There is no fixed schedule, but D.C. Circuit appeals commonly take many months to a year (often 9–18 months) from filing the notice of appeal to a final decision; complex, high‑profile cases (and those with motions for panel rehearing or en banc review) can take longer. The FTCs Jan. 20, 2026 notice of appeal starts that process in the D.C. Circuit.
Yes. Ordinarily Metas business operations and the district courts judgment remain in effect while the appeal proceeds unless a court orders a stay; the FTC must seek a stay from the district court or the D.C. Circuit to pause any remedial orders. (Here, the Jan. 20, 2026 filing was a notice of appeal after a ruling that favored Meta, so there are no new divestiture orders in effect that the appeal would stay.)