Search for: "In re Apple Processor Litigation" Results 1 - 20 of 61
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 May 2024, 5:11 am by Greg Lambert
And, you know, when you’re representing insurance companies, you got to do the billable hour, you have to code all of your entries in a certain way. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 6:00 am by Michelle
The 1977 decision, which was recently reaffirmed in the high court’s 2019 holding in Apple Inc. v. [read post]
26 Sep 2023, 10:30 pm by Florian Mueller
In economic terms it is, however, pretty unimportant compared to the fact that Apple, due to its failure to make its own iPhone-grade baseband processor, had to extend the chipset purchasing agreement with Qualcomm by another three years (2024-2026), which presumably means that Apple exercised an option to extend its standard-essential patent royalty payments as well. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 1:17 am by Florian Mueller
If anything, Apple has a long-term plan to keep SEP royalties down, and in the mid term it may be interesting to see what happens if Apple uses its own baseband processors and then negotiates a new patent license with Qualcomm. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 11:56 pm by Florian Mueller
Yesterday (Friday), Qualcomm filed its motion for summary judgment: In Re Qualcomm Antitrust Litigation (case no. 3:17-md-2773-JSC, N.D. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 4:15 am by Allan Blutstein
But whether we’re talking about the government-impairment prong of the National Parks test, or Critical Mass’s “customary” standard for voluntary submissions, I’m not sure it makes a huge difference in the end vis-à-vis foreseeable harm. [read post]
7 Jan 2023, 5:13 am by Florian Mueller
It was a resounding victory for Qualcomm's counsel from multiple firms under the strategic leadership of Cravath Swaine & Moore's Gary Bornstein, whose work for Epic Games (against Apple and Google) I have mentioned many times.Still, there is a class action pending in the Northern District of California: In Re: Qualcomm Antitrust litigation, but no longer before Judge Lucy H. [read post]
15 Dec 2022, 10:00 am by Ben Sperry & Kristian Stout
Apple is sometimes derided as an unfair gatekeeper of speech through its App Store. [read post]
20 Oct 2022, 8:35 am by Dan Lopez
Both companies refused, although if you can find in their letter where exactly they refused, you’re very good at reading purposely evasive text. [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 7:15 am by Eric Goldman
It may depend on whether Apple paid any money to the Toast Plus app or acted as a payment processor. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 8:03 am by Florian Mueller
At the moment, Apple reduces that commission only by 3% for Dutch dating apps--which barely offsets the cost of using a third-party payment processor. [read post]
19 Jun 2022, 10:22 pm by Florian Mueller
Apple FRAND litigation in the Eastern District of Texas, Apple doesn't want Ericsson to conduct discovery of certain App Store issues. [read post]
This provision is clearly designed to target data brokers and potentially ad networks or processors that operate behind the scenes. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 9:06 am by Eric Goldman
” * In re: Marriott International Customer Data Security Breach Litig., 2022 WL 822925 (D. [read post]
30 Mar 2022, 7:56 am by Dennis Crouch
In re Donaldson Co., 16 F.3d 1189 (Fed.Cir.1994) (en banc). [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 12:12 pm by Bob Ambrogi
How we’re unique: Starting from basic marketplace, Amazon+Uber for lawyers, approach, AppearMe is implementing machine learning to automate routine legal work, minimize errors and missed deadlines by targeting the $65B litigation support market and offering free case management tools (a $1.1B market). [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 12:12 pm by Bob Ambrogi
How we’re unique: Starting from basic marketplace, Amazon+Uber for lawyers, approach, AppearMe is implementing machine learning to automate routine legal work, minimize errors and missed deadlines by targeting the $65B litigation support market and offering free case management tools (a $1.1B market). [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 4:20 am by Annsley Merelle Ward
” 8  GPNE’s technical expert conceded that “each of the GPRS and LTE signals identified in [his] report are processed by the . . . base band processors in Apple products” and offered the same infringement theory for various accused Apple products because they all contained the same baseband processor chipsets.9  GPNE further confirmed that “the baseband processor ... enables the cellular functionality in… [read post]