|
|
|
Apple lists 8 Samsung products it wants banned
Headline News |
2012/08/29 10:32
|
Apple Inc. on Monday gave a federal judge a list of eight Samsung Electronics Co. products it wants pulled from shelves and banned from the U.S. market, including popular Galaxy model smartphones.
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh asked for the list after a jury in San Jose last week slammed Samsung with a $1.05 billion verdict, finding that the South Korean technology giant had "willfully" copied Apple's iPhone and iPad in creating and marketing the products. Samsung plans an appeal.
The products Apple wants out are all smartphones: Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S2 AT&T, Galaxy S2, Galaxy S2 T-Mobile, Galaxy S2 Epic 4G, Galaxy S Showcase, Droid Charge and Galaxy Prevail.
Koh on June 26 banned the Galaxy Tab 10.1 from the U.S. market after finding it likely violated a "design patent." Samsung is now asking for that ban to be lifted after the jury found the computer tablet didn't infringe that particular patent, but it did find it infringed three Apple's software patents that cover the popular "bounce-back" and pinch-to-zoom features.
The judge has scheduled a Sept. 20 hearing to discuss Apple's demands for the sales bans. She asked Apple on Friday to submit the list of products its wants removed from U.S. stores after Samsung complained that it doesn't have enough time to prepare for the scheduled hearing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action
Law Firm News |
2012/08/24 11:08
|
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP has filed a securities class action lawsuit against Monster Beverage Corporation and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, is on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Monster securities between February 23, 2012 and August 9, 2012, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). This securities class action seeks to recover damages caused by the Company's violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder against the Company and certain of its top officials.
If you are a shareholder who purchased Monster securities during the Class Period, you have until October 22, 2012 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.
The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York and Chicago, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 75 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of defrauded investors.
www.pomerantzlaw.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court upholds summary for St. Louis police measure
Court Watch |
2012/08/22 14:08
|
A Missouri appellate court has upheld the proposed ballot summary for an initiative that would end state control of the St. Louis Police Department.
The Missouri Court of Appeals' Western District ruled Tuesday that the summary is fair and sufficient. The American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri had filed a lawsuit challenging the summary.
The ballot measure calls for St. Louis to oversee the city's police department instead of a state commission. Election officials reported earlier this month that supporters had submitted enough valid signatures for the measure to appear on the November statewide ballot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man who killed wife, baby loses appeal in Mass.
Law Center |
2012/08/17 10:48
|
The highest court in Massachusetts rejected the appeal of a British man convicted of killing his wife and baby daughter in their rented home, saying in its decision released Tuesday that warrantless searches of the home were justified because those inside might have been in danger.
In arguing for a new trial, lawyers for Neil Entwistle said evidence obtained during the warrantless searches of the Hopkinton home while police were looking for the missing family should have been dismissed at trial.
They also argued he was denied a fair trial, claiming that "saturating and inflammatory" media coverage tainted the jury pool and the judge refused to question prospective jurors more deeply about how publicity may have biased them.
The court rejected the arguments, concluding that Entwistle "received a fair trial that was ably tried and judged."
Entwistle was convicted of the 2006 shootings of his wife, Rachel, and their daughter, 9-month-old Lillian. He is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for their murders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge won't halt Pa. voter identification law
Court Watch |
2012/08/15 10:48
|
A tough new voter identification law championed by Republicans can take effect in Pennsylvania for November's presidential election, a judge ruled Wednesday, despite a torrent of criticism that it will suppress votes among President Barack Obama's supporters and make it harder for the elderly, disabled, poor and young adults to vote.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said he would not grant an injunction that would have halted the law, which requires each voter to show a valid photo ID. Opponents are expected to file an appeal within a day or two to the state Supreme Court as the Nov. 6 election looms.
"We're not done, it's not over," said Witold J. Walczak, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who helped argue the case for the plaintiffs. "It's why they make appeals courts."
The Republican-penned law — which passed over the objections of Democrats — has ignited a furious debate over voting rights as Pennsylvania is poised to play a key role in deciding the presidential contest. Plaintiffs, including a 93-year-old woman who recalled marching with Martin Luther King Jr. in 1960, had asked Simpson to block the law from taking effect in this year's election as part of a wider challenge to its constitutionality.
Republicans defend the law as necessary to protect the integrity of the election. But Democrats say the law will make it harder for people who lack ID for valid reasons to vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pa. high court fast tracks juvenile lifer appeals
Legal Interview |
2012/08/10 12:10
|
Pennsylvania's highest court is moving quickly to determine how to respond to a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles aren't constitutional.
The Sentencing Project, an advocacy group based in Washington, has said Pennsylvania leads the nation in the number of juvenile lifers.
The state Supreme Court scheduled oral argument for Sept. 13 in a pair of cases that will determine what to do about the hundreds of people serving such sentences, as well as how to handle the issue going forward.
The 5-to-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision issued June 25 still makes it possible for juveniles to get life, but it can't be automatic.
The Pennsylvania Department of Corrections says 373 lifers were under age 18 at the time they were sentenced. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
