A federal judge in California said Friday she will rule by Wednesday on whether to temporarily block Paramount Skydance’s $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery after the company told the court it would not close the deal until at least mid-August.

Friday’s hearing was the first in the fight over the blockbuster deal, which would create one of the world’s largest film studios.

It also would allow Paramount to bolster its streaming efforts through a potential combination of HBO Max and Paramount+, enabling it to gain market share and compete more directly with market leader Netflix.

But 12 Democrat-led states, led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit July 13 seeking a temporary restraining order to halt the merger, which has been approved by federal regulators. The plaintiffs argue the merger would reduce competition, leading to higher prices and less content for consumers.

U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín, a Biden appointee serving in the Northern District of California, said she would decide by Wednesday whether to issue a restraining order.

The case was assigned to Martínez-Olguín on July 15 after Paramount sought to disqualify the judge initially assigned to the case because he formerly worked as a labor attorney, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday. Martínez-Olguín said she inherited the case because she already was overseeing another lawsuit involving the merger — not because Paramount had requested a change.

That lawsuit was filed in April by several Paramount+ subscribers who allege they would face higher prices and diminished viewing options if the merger went through. On Thursday, Martínez-Olguín denied their bid for a temporary restraining order, the San Francisco Chronicle reported, saying the plaintiffs “failed to submit a single item of evidence in support of the motion” and questioning their “standing to pursue these antitrust claims.”

Antitrust attorney James H. Weingarten of the Washington, D.C., law firm Milbank represents California and the other states. He told Martínez-Olguín on Friday it would be impossible to untangle the companies if they were allowed to merge.

“If this merger is allowed to close ... the harms begin,” Weingarten said, according to the Times. “The job losses, the synergies — that’s the fancy word for ‘we’re going to save money and there might be job cuts.’ All of that process starts rolling.”

Paramount, represented by antitrust attorney Jeffrey L. Kessler, argued a temporary restraining order was unnecessary.

Kessler argued the parties should instead focus on the next major step — whether the judge issues a preliminary injunction. Such a ruling could delay the deal for months.

Kessler said Paramount should be allowed a hearing by the end of August to defend against a preliminary injunction, according to the Times. The company wants to wrap up the litigation by late September to avoid a higher payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders.

Earlier this year, Paramount offered Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders a “ticking fee” of 25 cents for every quarter after Sept. 30 until the deal closes. Such payments would cost Paramount more than $7 million a day, which Kessler called a “massive injury,” according to the Times.