In response to Apple’s filing suit in Seoul against Samsung for infringement of Apple’s newly granted patent on the touch screen user interface, Samsung has filed a complaint with the United States International Trade Commission seeking to prevent Apple from importing iPads and iPhones. Samsung claims Apple has infringed five of its patents related to smartphones and tables. Samsung also filed suit in London against Apple for patent infringement. Apple and Samsung are not just competitors. Apple is the largest buyer of computer and phone chips. Samsung is the world’s largest manufacturer of those chips. It appears each would have plenty of business reasons for reaching a settlement.
Author Archives: david
In a decision issued June 29, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It found that the minimum coverage provision is a valid exercise of legislative power by Congress under the Commerce Clause. This is the first appellate ruling on the law. The decision was by a three-judge panel with one member dissenting. Look for a motion for rehearing en banc within 14 days. Oral arguments have been heard in similar cases in the Fourth and Eleventh Circuits, but those cases have not yet been decided. http://1.usa.gov/mOSdyo
On Monday, a Cambodian court began proceedings against four former leaders of the communist Khmer Rouge regime of the 1970s. The four defendants, now elderly, are the first to face trial. They are charged with crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide, religious persecution, homicide and torture. They have pleaded not guilty. The UN-backed court was established in 2001 to investigate and try those responsible for the Cambodian genocide that resulted in the death of approximately 1.7 million people, one-third of the Cambodian population, between 1975 and 1979.
Apple has finally been awarded a key patent related to the iOS user interface as implemented on the original iPhone. The patent is written broadly enough it may also apply to such other devices as tablets and touch screen media players. Apple has already filed suit against competitors including HTC and Samsung. As Sanford would say: “This is the big one Elizabeth.” http://bit.ly/kGAfmA
On June 28, 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled in McDonald v. Chicago that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment makes the Second Amendment right to bear arms applicable to the states as well as the federal government. http://bit.ly/mfXnje
Apple filed suit Friday in the Seoul Central District Court claiming that the Samsung “Galaxy” line of products copies its iPhone and iPad technology. This follows similar suits by Apple in the US and suits by Samsung filed in South Korea, Japan and Germany. http://bit.ly/iUuhqF
The South Carolina House of Representatives voted 69-43 on Tuesday to enact legislation aimed at reforming the state’s immigration laws. The immigration reform bill allows police officers to check a suspect’s immigration status during a lawful stop, seizure, detention, or arrest, and mandates businesses to participate in the E-Verify system. The Bill now heads to South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley for signing. Several civil rights groups have announced they will challenge the consitutionality of the law in court.
Eight states and three private land trusts brought an action invoking the federal common law of public nuisance seeking to create an annual declining cap on greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA does not presently regulate such emissions. The US Supreme Court on Monday ruled in American Electric Power v Connecticut that a claim regarding greenhouse gasses cannot be brought under the legal framework of nuisance. The court held that to challenge greenhouse gas emissions the plaintiffs may file petitions for rule-making with the EPA to set emissions standards. By the time this case reached the Supreme Court, the EPA had already begun the rule-making process on the issue and is set to issue new standards by May 2012.
The US Supreme Court today in Wal-Mart v. Dukes that a group of women seeking to recover damages from Wal-Mart failed to meet the requirements for class certification. The case, a Title VII gender discrimination lawsuit including more than 1.5 million women, argues that Wal-Mart’s nationwide policies result in lower pay for women in comparable positions and longer waits for management promotions. http://bit.ly/iS5Efl