FORTUNE -- Michael Bromwich is driving Apple (AAPL) crazy.
This should not come as a surprise. Bromwich, appointed by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote last month to make sure Apple does everything she ordered when she found Apple guilty of conspiring to fix the price of e-books, is an old hand at this kind of thing. A former inspector general, he has supervised high-profile investigations of the DOJ, the FBI and the CIA. He's got his way of doing things.
Apple also has its way of doing things. Its corporate culture is famously insular and its leadership unaccustomed to meddling from outsiders, never mind emissaries from the Southern District of New York. Apple's senior staff still still doesn't think they did anything wrong when they challenged Amazon's (AMZN) monopoly of the e-book market in 2010 -- no matter what the court ruled last summer.
Bromwich, Apple complained Wednesday, has already gone beyond his mandate -- not waiting the 90 days outlined in the Judge's order, but demanding immediate, unfettered access to Apple's senior staff and board members, including Tim Cook, Al Gore, Jony Ive and executives who had nothing to do with e-books.
Even worse, from Apple's point of view, Judge Cote issued an order last week that not only backed Bromwich in his disputes with Apple, but handed him extra investigative powers. These include license to interview Apple execs without a lawyer present, to tell the judge in private what he's learned, to preserve any documents he comes across related to his duties and to make them public when, in his view, doing so serves "the interest of justice."
Apple's sharply worded motion raises several legal objections -- including the constitutionality of being "investigated by an individual whose personal financial interest is for as broad and lengthy an investigation as possible." (The fact that Bromwich billed Apple more for two weeks work -- $138,432 -- than most federal judges earn in nine months was already making headlines Friday.)
But the harsh language of Apple's motion also leaves no doubt that the company believes the judge has dropped any pretense of impartiality and may have given it grounds for "judicial disqualification."
In other words, if she doesn't back down, Apple could try to get Cote -- a senior federal judge with 19 years on the bench -- pulled off the case.
"No litigant," it concludes, "could possibly take comfort in the objectiveness of a court's judgment in ruling on fiercely contested motions and proceedings when the court is regularly meeting privately with a judicially appointed investigator charged with looking to uncover evidence of possible wrongdoing by that litigant. And to the extent the Court actually intended to unleash Mr. Bromwich as its agent in this manner, such order transforms the Court from an impartial arbiter of "Cases" and "Controversies" into Apple's litigation adversary."
Michael Bromwich was not available for comment.
UPDATE: AllThingsD has posted a letter Bromwich sent to Apple's Board of Directors that sheds some light on how the process looks from his point of view. "Our requests to meet with key Apple personnel have been largely ignored, and when not ignored the responses have been extremely slow in coming," he writes. "The company's has spent far more time challenging the terms of our compensation and raising other objections related to administrative matters, even though the Court Order provide no role for Apple in setting the monitor's compensation."
The e-book antitrust judge picks a compliance monitor with an interesting track record.
FORTUNE -- On Wednesday the U.S. government lawyers who prosecuted -- and won -- the e-book antitrust trial against Apple (AAPL) got the external antitrust compliance monitor they asked for.
What they didn't get was the monitoring they wanted -- and Apple's lawyers feared -- by an outsider with broad powers to block any agreements the company might make MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Oct 16, 2013 6:06 PM ET
Meet Ted Boutrous, the lawyer handling Apple's appeal of the e-book antitrust verdict.
FORTUNE -- On Thursday, three months after a U.S. district judge ruled that Apple (AAPL) had conspired with five publishers to fix the price of e-books, the company filed its notice of appeal.
The case will be handled from here on in by Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., the smiling man with a sheaf of papers and a helmet of MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Oct 7, 2013 10:44 AM ET
But Andrew Ross Sorkin gets the last word: A dig at Apple's CEO.
FORTUNE -- Even as Apple (AAPL) and the Department of Justice exchanged increasingly testy documents regarding the proposed remedy in the e-book antitrust case ("A broadside masquerading as a brief," was how Apple characterized the DOJ's latest), CNBC used the opportunity to hammer home the theme the network has pursued for nine months now: that Apple is doomed.
The result Tuesday morning MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Aug 27, 2013 12:09 PM ET
Lawyers have complained for years that she pre-judges cases before she enters the courtroom.
FORTUNE -- To her credit, the remedies U.S. DIstrict Judge Denise Cote proposed last week to prevent Apple (AAPL) from ever again conspiring to fix e-book prices were far less draconian (and frankly bizarre) than the ones the Department of Justice had requested. See DOJ remedies.
But the air of unreality that permeated her earlier decision in the MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Aug 14, 2013 6:19 AM ET
Three cases in three venues, but the one in the Federal Appeals Court mattered most.
FORTUNE -- Friday was a busy day for Apple (AAPL) legal.
In a District Court in New York, the judge who found Apple liable for antitrust violations in the e-book price fixing case denied -- unsurprisingly, given her past rulings -- Apple's petition to suspend consideration of remedies and penalties until its appeal of her decision could MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Aug 10, 2013 7:39 AM ET
Will consumers buy as many e-books when they can borrow them?
By Verne Kopytoff
FORTUNE -- Amazon's dominance in digital books is under perpetual attack by Google (GOOG) and Apple (AAPL). Now you can add another threat to the list: the public library. That's what an analyst from Barclays suggested in a recent research report. Consumers will likely avoid buying e-books if they can borrow them from the library for free.
"As MOREJul 22, 2013 10:13 AM ET
Can the popular 3DS handheld become a reading device? One publisher thinks so.
By Michael Fitzpatrick
FORTUNE -- Can Nintendo's 3DS handheld become a powerhouse e-reader? Japan's biggest printer, Dai Nippon Printing, thinks so. The company, which is a big player in domestic publishing here, announced it will launch 300 titles for young readers this fall for Nintendo's popular portable console.
Dai Nippon is already selling e-books and manga through conventional e-readers, MOREJul 8, 2013 10:53 AM ET
The government's e-book antitrust case against Apple makes perfect sense -- so long as you don't ask why Amazon was pricing below cost.
By Roger Parloff, senior editor
FORTUNE -- By the time summations concluded last week in the government's e-book antitrust suit against Apple, Apple had amply vindicated CEO Tim Cook's out-of-court characterization of the case as "bizarre."
Yet it still might not win. On the contrary, if federal judges read MOREJun 25, 2013 2:51 PM ET
Questioned repeatedly by the judge, does not dispute that they engaged in a conspiracy.
FORTUNE -- "I have no opinion."
That was Orin Snyder's first reply after U.S. District Judge Denise Cote questioned him early in his closing arguments in U.S.A. v. Apple, the antitrust case the Department of Justice filed against Apple (AAPL) and five publishers in April 2012.
We'll deal with what Apple's lead counsel said in his summation after we've heard MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jun 20, 2013 1:58 PM ET
|Light bulb ban set to take effect|
|Ford set for most aggressive expansion in 50 years|
|Netflix finds plenty of binge watching, but little guilt|
|Military families worry about skyrocketing grocery bill|
|Military retirees: You betrayed us, Congress|