News & Analysis as of

Appeals iPhone

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Sends iPhone Patent Dispute Back for Third Damages Trial

McDermott Will & Emery on

Considering numerous claim construction, infringement and damages issues related to patents allegedly covering Apple’s iPhones 5 and 6 series technology, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Nota Bene Episode 98: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Mark on U.S. Antitrust Law for 2020 with Thomas Dillickrath and Bevin Newman

The United States Supreme Court infrequently hears antitrust cases but when it decides to hear a case, the Court has the power to shape the framework of American antitrust laws. In this episode, we’re examining the...more

King & Spalding

Ninth Circuit Affirms Denial of Class Certification Based on Failure to Provide Sufficient Damages Model—Or Any Damages Model at...

King & Spalding on

On November 13, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the Northern District of California’s denial of class certification in an action against Apple, Inc., holding that the plaintiffs’ expert’s wait-and-see approach to calculating the...more

Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics...

UK Court of Appeal rules against Google

Report on Supply Chain Compliance, Volume 2, no. 19 (October 10, 2019) - A case involving the “Safari Workaround”[1] has made its way through the U.K. courts over the past 18 months and has recently been allowed to proceed....more

King & Spalding

Supreme Court Rules Apple Must Face Antitrust Suit by App Store Purchasers

King & Spalding on

On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court issued a 5–4 decision holding that iPhone owners who purchased applications through Apple’s App Store were “direct purchasers” who could sue Apple for monopolization....more

Jones Day

Insights from the Supreme Court’s Apple v. Pepper Antitrust Decision

Jones Day on

In May 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5–4 decision in Apple v. Pepper, one of the Court's most significant antitrust rulings of the last several years. In a majority opinion authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Court...more

K&L Gates LLP

Follow The Money: The Supreme Court Defines the “First Purchaser” to Whom Illinois Brick Limits Antitrust Damage Claims as a...

K&L Gates LLP on

In a 5–4 decision, in Apple, Inc. v. Pepper, the U.S. Supreme Court (the “Court”) followed the its 1977 precedent in Illinois Brick v. Illinois, which limits the assertion of antitrust damage claims to the first purchaser...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Future of Antitrust Class Actions Foreshadowed in Apple Inc. v. Pepper

On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its most recent decision relating to antitrust class action litigation. The case, Apple Inc. v. Pepper, No. 17-204, could represent a significant shift in antitrust class action...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

SCOTUS Blows Down Apple’s House Made of Illinois Brick

In a 5-4 split decision, the U.S. Supreme Court appears to have reworked a longstanding precedent that has been a foundation of antitrust litigation for more than 40 years—the “direct purchaser” rule of Illinois Brick, which...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Evolving Antitrust Principles in the Age of Big Tech: Supreme Court Allows Antitrust Suit to Move Forward Against Apple

In a recent decision decided on May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court allowed an antitrust suit to move forward against Apple.  Consumers brought suit based on Apple’s operation of its App Store – which serves as the exclusive...more

Carlton Fields

Supreme Court Upholds Ninth Circuit Decision: Antitrust Action Against Apple May Proceed

Carlton Fields on

In a 5-4 ruling issued on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court in Apple Inc. v. Pepper determined that iPhone users may proceed with their claims against Apple over its alleged anticompetitive app store practices. The decision...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Apple Inc. v. Pepper: The Supreme Court Chips Away at Illinois Brick, Allowing iPhone Users to Sue Apple for Monopolizing iPhone...

• The U.S. Supreme Court split 5-4 on how to apply Illinois Brick’s prohibition on federal indirect purchaser lawsuits to a case where plaintiff app purchasers bought apps from the Apple App Store, paying a price set by the...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

App Store Purchasers Entitled To Bite At The Antitrust Apple, Says Supreme Court

Fox Rothschild LLP on

The United States Supreme Court decided this week that purchasers of apps through the Apple App Store have standing under federal antitrust law to bring a class-action lawsuit against the tech giant....more

Alston & Bird

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies the Direct-Purchaser Rule, Allows App Purchasers to Proceed Against Apple

Alston & Bird on

Wondering if you’re a direct purchaser from a monopoly? There’s a Supreme Court ruling for that. Our Antitrust Team downloads the Court’s Apple v. Pepper decision and considers its conclusions and implications....more

Weintraub Tobin

U.S. Supreme Court Allows App Store Anti-Trust Class Action To Proceed Against Apple

Weintraub Tobin on

In APPLE INC. v. PEPPER ET AL., case number 17-204, the United States Supreme Court considered a case alleging Apple has monopolized the retail market for the sale of apps and has unlawfully used its monopolistic power to...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Holds Antitrust Claims of iPhone App Consumers Are Not Barred by Illinois Brick

On May 13, 2019, in a 5-4 decision in Apple Inc. v. Pepper, the U.S. Supreme Court held that consumers of iPhone apps are direct purchasers of Apple and therefore have standing to sue the company for alleged monopolization of...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Apple Inc. v. Pepper

On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Apple Inc. v. Pepper, No. 17-204, holding that iPhone owners who purchase apps from Apple’s App Store are “direct purchasers” from Apple and may sue Apple for alleged monopolization...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Court of Appeal Confirms that There is Only One Standard for the Admission of Expert Testimony and that Expert Opinion...

Deciding an issue of first impression, the California Court of Appeal issued a writ of mandate confirming that there is only one standard for the admissibility of expert opinion in California, and that standard applies when...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Immigration Fact and Fiction for the U.S. Employer: More on CBP Searching Electronic Devices – What is Left of the Fourth...

As mentioned in a prior blog post, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) can conduct searches of individuals departing the United States, a fact that many are not aware of. In fact, the rule that failure to declare...more

Robinson+Cole Data Privacy + Security Insider

Third Circuit Holds Criminal Defendant in Contempt for Refusing to Decrypt Hard Drives

In a precedential ruling, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals this week upheld a lower court’s ruling holding a criminal defendant in contempt for refusing to decrypt two external hard drives that were seized during a child...more

Perkins Coie

Ninth Circuit Refines Antitrust Standing Doctrine Under Illinois Brick

Perkins Coie on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently addressed again when plaintiffs have standing to pursue federal antitrust claims under the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431...more

Genova Burns LLC

Federal Circuit Gives Samsung Another Victory Against Apple In The Smartphone Patent War

Genova Burns LLC on

In another twist of fortunes in the long-running smartphone patent war between Apple and Samsung, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has once again overturned Apple’s patent infringement jury verdict – this...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | October 2015

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Revives Possibility of Permanent Injunction in Apple-Samsung Patent Dispute - In Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Appeal No. 2014-1802, the Federal Circuit reversed for abuse of discretion the...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Design Patent Case Digest: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

Decision Date: May 18, 2015 - Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Patents: D593,087; D604,305; D618,677 - Holding: Judgment of trade dress dilution REVERSED; judgment of patent validity and...more

24 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide