Alaska Airlines requested a U.S. judge on Friday to dismiss a consumer lawsuit challenging its $1.9 billion plan to acquire Hawaiian Airlines.
The airline argued that the merger would not unlawfully consolidate power within the transportation industry.
In a filing submitted to the Hawaii federal court, Alaska Airlines contended that the plaintiffs’ April lawsuit failed to demonstrate any “concrete, particularized and impending harm” to passengers if the deal proceeds.
The airline described the plaintiffs as “serial litigants” who have previously filed lawsuits over other airline mergers, labeling their claims as “boilerplate.”
Alaska Airlines declined to provide further comments on Friday.
The plaintiffs’ attorney, representing eight airline passengers from Hawaii, California, and other states, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The lawsuit argued that “the current trend toward concentration, the lessening of competition and the tendency to create a monopoly in the airlines industry is unmatched, unparalleled, and dangerous.”
In response, Alaska Airlines claimed in Friday’s filing that “the merger will vastly expand their customers’ access to the rest of the world.”
The proposed deal is under antitrust review by the U.S. Justice Department.
Both airlines stated in March that they “have been working cooperatively with the DOJ and expect to continue to do so.” A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment on Friday.
Hawaiian Airlines is not named as a defendant in the consumers’ lawsuit.
The case is titled Warren Yoshimoto et al v. Alaska Airlines and Alaska Air Group, U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, No. 1:24-cv-00173.
For the plaintiffs: Terence O’Toole of Starn O’Toole Marcus & Fisher, and Joseph Alioto of Alioto Law Firm.
For Alaska Air: Courtney Dyer, Stephen McIntyre, Anna Pletcher, and Pete Herrick of O’Melveny & Myers.