UPDATE (Dec 21): U.S. District Judge Denise Cote has selected Hagens Berman and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll as co-lead counsel in the litigation. In a statement, Cohen Milstein partner Kit Pierson said, "We think this is a very important case for American consumers. It is a privilege to represent the class in this matter and we expect this case to move forward with dispatch."

Hagens Berman lost the battle over where the multidistrict litigation of antitrust claims against Apple and several book publishers should be based. Earlier this month the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation agreed with Finkelstein Thompson that the e-books MDL should be litigated in federal court in Manhattan, where the publisher defendants are based, and not in the Northern District of California, where Apple is headquartered and where Hagens Berman filed the first e-books antitrust class action in August.

But that was really just a skirmish in the plaintiffs' war to lead the case, which intensified Monday with the filing of briefs in support of at least three rival lead counsel bids. U.S. District Court Judge Denise Cote, who's overseeing the cases, has a lot of reading to do over the holiday break.

The JPML's decision arguably puts Hagens at a disadvantage since the firm is based on the West Coast. In fact, Grant & Eisenhofer's lead-counsel brief plays up the firm's dedication to New York, specifically stating that all of the G&E lawyers slated to work on the e-books case are based in New York and noting prominently that the firm worked with Finkelstein Thompson to defeat Hagens Berman's bid to have the cases consolidated in California. (Finkelstein and co-counsel Lovell Stewart Halebian Jacobson said in their brief filed Monday that they support Grant & Eisenhofer as lead, but that Finkelstein is "ready, willing, and able" if Cote wants more than one lead.) Grant & Eisenhofer, which asserted that it has developed confidential publishing industry sources since it began investigating the case in March, said it also has the support of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd; Berger & Montague, and Faruqi & Faruqi, among other firms.

Only one "outlier," according to G&E, opposes its leadership bid. But the "outlier" -- Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll -- has its own list of supporters. The Cohen Milstein lead-counsel brief names (among others) Kirby McInerny; Girard Gibbs; Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross; and Milberg. What's more, Cohen Milstein said its preference is a co-lead counsel structure in which it controls the East Coast wing of the case and Hagens Berman takes the lead on the West Coast.

In Dec. 1 letters to the Manhattan federal judge previously overseeing the e-books litigation, Grant & Eisenhofer and Cohen Milstein both advocated for co-leadership with Hagens Berman, but Grant & Eisenhofer seems to have moved toward a bid for sole control, at least on an interim basis.

Hagens Berman, meanwhile, asserted in its lead-counsel brief Monday that Grant & Eisenhofer -- and everyone else who has named Amazon or Random House as a defendant -- doesn't really understand the alleged price-fixing conspiracy that Hagens began investigating back in 2009. Amazon and Random House, according to Hagens, stood against the conspiracy, and should be treated as witnesses, not defendants. Hagens's brief said the firm still backs co-leadership, as it did in the Dec. 1 letter, and does not advocate for one East Coast firm over another. But if Cote intends to appoint only one interim lead counsel, the brief said, it should be Hagens Berman. (Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willissubmitted a brief supporting Hagens Berman but also suggesting itself as an alternative.)

I called lawyers at G&E, Cohen Milstein, and Hagens Berman but didn't hear back.

(Reporting by Alison Frankel)