David Ellison Warns Paramount Executives It Will Begin Exiting California on Oct. 1 If California AG Won’t Negotiate Settlement in WBD Merger Antitrust Case

Paramount CEO David Ellison told senior executives last week that the company will begin the process of exiting California on Oct. 1 if California Attorney General Rob Bonta will not negotiate to settle an antitrust case tied to the Warner Bros. Discovery merger, according to a report from Deadline published Monday.

Deadline said Ellison made the remarks during an internal meeting with top Paramount leaders, framing the move as conditional on whether the state’s attorney general agrees to enter negotiations over a settlement structure in the lawsuit rather than pursuing litigation.

The report links the planned timeline directly to the attorney general’s posture in the WBD merger antitrust matter, and it places Ellison’s directive within the broader legal dispute over how antitrust law is applied to large media combinations, including questions about market power, competition, and remedies the parties might accept without a continued court fight.

If Paramount carries out the stated plan, the practical effect would be felt across the company’s California-based work, including corporate functions and the day-to-day operations that rely on a California footprint. The report did not specify which facilities, business units, or employees would be affected first, nor did it outline the precise legal mechanics of “exiting” the state, but such a process would typically involve staffing, contracting, and compliance changes that can affect production pipelines and service vendors.

Ellison’s warning also puts public officials in the spotlight, since the condition described in the report turns on whether Bonta is willing to negotiate a settlement instead of continuing the case through the courts. In an environment where states sometimes seek specific remedies or structural commitments from large companies, the choice to negotiate or litigate can shape the pace of proceedings and the final outcome for both regulators and the regulated companies.

The report does not indicate any immediate action from the California attorney general, and it does not describe whether Paramount has already proposed settlement terms or what response, if any, the company expects before the Oct. 1 date. Paramount’s next step, under Ellison’s stated plan, would be to begin whatever procedural actions are required to implement a move out of California, with the litigation continuing alongside any administrative and operational changes.

As of Monday, Ellison’s statement remained a company-side timeline communicated to executives, while the state’s approach to settlement talks and the status of the underlying antitrust dispute remain key variables for how quickly the situation develops.