In the opinion [ PDF ] Media skewered the Commission's arguments that the General Court erred in its assessment of Intel's dealings with HP and non-cash advances provided to Lenovo in exchange for exclusive use of its CPUs. In the first case, Medina concluded that the Commission failed to adequately support the claims. And, with regard to Lenovo, the advocate general affirmed the General Courts 2022 findings, which took issue with Commission's application of the as-efficient-competitor (AEC) test. The test is a framework for establishing to what extent certain business practices, like rebates, are harmful to competition. According to Medina, "the court should confirm that the Commission erred in applying the AEC test with respect to HP and Lenovo." While Medina's opinion doesn't bode well for Brussels' antitrust case against Intel, it is non-binding: the General Court can take it or leave it. It's also worth noting that Medina's opinion only addresses two of six grounds for appeal raised by the Commission.