Elon Musk’s X is trying to revive a lawsuit against advertisers it’s accusing of illegally boycotting the social media platform, despite previously reaching a settlement to end litigation against an ad-industry trade group.

“This case involves an unusually brazen group boycott,” X said in a filing yesterday. “That misconduct has drawn the attention of regulators and Congress. There is no valid reason that this effort by the direct victim to recover its massive economic losses from that boycott should not move forward.”

X’s lawsuit was thrown out in March when US District Judge Jane Boyle in the Northern District of Texas ruled that advertisers did not commit any antitrust violation. Last week, Musk reached a settlement with the World Federation of Advertisers, the first defendant named in the lawsuit.

But Musk’s lawsuit had other defendants: Mars, Incorporated; CVS Health; Nestle; Abbott Laboratories; Colgate-Palmolive; Lego; Pinterest; Tyson Foods; Shell; and Ørsted A/S. While X agreed to dismiss the World Federation of Advertisers from the case, it urged the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to revive the suit with respect to the other defendants.

The boycott “injured X and competition in that market, allowing other social-media platforms to charge rates above truly competitive pricing,” the company said. “Especially in light of the power defendants wield within the market, their agreement to boycott X cannot be characterized as anything other than an unreasonable restraint on trade.”

Judge: Losing to competitors is not antitrust injury

Boyle’s decision dismissing Musk’s lawsuit said the “only harm X has asserted is that its customers collectively chose X’s competitors over X.” Boyle, a George W. Bush appointee, cited a precedent that a loss from competition itself does not constitute an antitrust injury. “Therefore, although a group boycott is alleged, there is no antitrust violation here,” she wrote.