Search for: "Apple v. Apple" Results 701 - 720 of 6,979
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Sep 2013, 9:52 pm by Florian Mueller
Samsung's "final five" patents list now contains two SEPs -- that's 40%, despite the fact that it knows it can hardly obtain an injunction over them.Last month Apple withdrew its FRAND antitrust counterclaims from the second California case (without prejudice, as always), but it still has a strong set of FRAND defenses in this case.Given that this is an important juncture in the case-narrowing effort for Apple v. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 4:15 am by Florian Mueller
It didn't make sense to me that the most important one of those Ericsson-Apple ITC cases (Ericsson also brought two additional complaints over non-SEPs, and Apple filed one non-SEP complaint relating to mmWave technology) should be handled by a "novice. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 2:15 pm by Gene Quinn
What is scandalous is the dismissal of this behavior in the recently filed amicus brief filed at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit by the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) in the matter of Apple, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Nov 2013, 4:29 am
Apple argues that the failure to align the scope of the claimed invention with the scope of the features explored in the survey means that this case is on all fours with Fractus, S.A. v. [read post]
16 Apr 2016, 10:57 am by Cody M. Poplin
Apple and the FBI may have been settled the litigation over the San Bernadino iPhone litigation, but that doesn’t mean the fight is over. [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 1:34 am by Florian Mueller
When ACT publishes pictures of its events, you see very small numbers of people--and mostly ACT staff and service providers.While I have disagreed with the FSA in some contexts (such as Continental v. [read post]
6 Oct 2018, 7:02 am by Florian Mueller
" And then they quote from a decision the District Court of Massachusetts made in August 2016 in Esoterix v. [read post]
15 May 2013, 10:47 am
Moreover, in HTC v Apple neither level of court made much of the restriction to a “device. [read post]