A California federal judge presiding over Democratic states' challenge to a U.S. Justice Department settlement greenlighting Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co.'s $14 billion acquisition of Juniper Networks Inc. ruled Tuesday that for now HPE doesn't need to reveal who's bidding for divested assets, and he refused to delay key deadlines despite ex-DOJ officials fighting subpoenas.

U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts ruled from the bench during a nearly hourlong virtual hearing on the latest discovery disputes in antitrust litigation that the DOJ brought in January 2025 and that a dozen states have since waded into.

During the hearing, Judge Pitts heard arguments on two discovery disputes and ultimately mostly ruled against the states, but with some caveats.

Judge Pitts overruled the states' objections to HPE redacting the names of the parties who are bidding for assets up for divestiture, but he said his ruling was without prejudice, so that the states could seek specific information about particular parties if they can show there is a "presumptively proportional" need for the additional information.

The second discovery dispute was over the states' request to push back court deadlines to allow them more time to seek subpoenas of former DOJ officials who are fighting depositions in their local courts.

Judge Pitts refused to push back nearly all current deadlines, keeping in place the scheduled March 23 hearing on the DOJ's motion for entry of final judgment. However, the judge noted that he may hold the hearing with the understanding that some discovery is ongoing and he may issue an interim ruling until the discovery is completed.

Judge Pitts said if the states identify particular items of discovery that they believe are crucial to his ruling but that haven't been produced, "You can identify those for me, explain why you think that no ruling should be issued until that discovery has been provided."

The DOJ initially sued to block HPE's acquisition of Juniper, claiming that the deal would eliminate head-to-head competition between HPE's Aruba and Juniper's Mist networks, leaving HPE and Cisco Systems with a 70% share of the U.S. market for commercial or enterprise-grade wireless local area networks.

However, in June, shortly before trial, federal enforcers cut a deal with HPE and Juniper. Weeks later, allegations surfaced that lobbyists had convinced senior DOJ officials to push the deal through over the objections of the Antitrust Division's front office, in a tussle that purportedly resulted in the ouster of two of the division's top deputies.

The DOJ has maintained that those were for insubordination, but in November Judge Pitts allowed a group of states to intervene to challenge the DOJ's settlement. The states allege that the settlement doesn't fix the problems the federal government previously identified with the merger.

Last month, Judge Pitts refused to block further integration between HPE and Juniper as the states pursue their legal challenge. In recent weeks, the parties informed the judge that they have been an impasse on numerous discovery disputes between the states and HPE, and the states and the DOJ.