A California magistrate judge on Wednesday granted Intel's request for a protective order safeguarding its highly confidential information from Qualcomm's in-house counsel in the Federal Trade Commission’s antitrust suit over Qualcomm’s patent licensing practices, saying the risks to Intel outweigh the benefits to Qualcomm.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Rite Aid and several others challenging a 2015 Federal Communications Commission order that expanded the scope of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act on Tuesday pushed the D.C. Circuit to look to a recent Second Circuit order in deciding how much latitude consumers should have to revoke their consent.
A New Jersey federal judge on Tuesday trimmed a proposed class action accusing a law firm of helping DirecTV engage in unlawful collections practices but refused to sink the case outright, finding that subscribers failed to establish a consumer fraud claim but that Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act allegations could move forward.
A consumer advocacy group told the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday that the pay-TV industry appears to be moving away from efforts to "ditch" the set-top box now that the FCC has dropped its plan to force them to unlock it, saying the industry has little motivation to change its approach.
Neal Katyal seemingly tried to educate Justice Samuel Alito about a well-known Latin phrase, Justice Sonia Sotomayor prayed aloud that she wouldn’t be assigned a mind-numbing opinion, and Justice Elena Kagan needled a lawyer who confused her with another justice. Here, Law360 wraps up the top moments of legal levity from the latest high court term.
Since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia last year, a new U.S. Supreme Court justice has emerged as the most talkative at oral arguments — and the titleholder should come as no surprise to court watchers.
The justices’ level of engagement at oral argument can provide a crucial window into their thinking on an issue, but interpreting what that might mean for how they’ll rule is an elusive art. Here, Law360 looks at the sessions in which each justice engaged the most.
Sprint Communications Co. LP must still pay local CenturyLink Inc. units about $12.5 million in access fees after Sprint cut the rates it paid and argued that it shouldn’t have to pay tariffs for connecting voice over internet protocol customers with traditional landlines, the Fifth Circuit affirmed in an opinion on Tuesday.
The American Civil Liberties Union’s Massachusetts chapter and an investigative journalist on Tuesday filed a lawsuit to open up the case files in a dispute over Twitter supboenas for Occupy Boston protesters.
In Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas seems to have found a U.S. Supreme Court justice after his own heart. The court’s newest member and its most silent one cast identical votes in case after case this year, at times taking positions deemed more conservative than those of their fellow Republican appointees on the court.
Apple and Samsung continued their California federal court fight Monday over whether Apple’s nearly $400 million damages award should stand in light of a related U.S. Supreme Court ruling, with Apple arguing Samsung waived its argument that the award should be smaller and Samsung contending a new trial on damages is warranted.
“Concurring opinion” can feel like a misnomer when a justice departs from — or downright slams — the reasoning of the majority. Here are the opinions from the latest U.S. Supreme Court term in which the biggest divisions bore the label of agreement.
Mechanisms for sharing the digital spectrum should be studied and developed to minimize interference issues for users and to ensure that companies investing in and deploying infrastructure can count on a stable regulatory environment, Federal Communications Commission Commissioner Michael O’Rielly told an international telecom conference on Monday.
While there were fewer dissents coming from the U.S. Supreme Court during its October 2016 term than in years past, justices still managed to come up with creative disses and blistering attacks when they were on the losing side. Here, Law360 highlights the term’s top dissents.
Inmate communications provider Securus asked the Federal Communications Commission Monday to dismiss a petition to deny its application to transfer ownership and control of agency licenses as part of a $1.5 billion acquisition, claiming that prison reform groups and others had misconstrued its intrastate calling rates as violating commission-imposed rate caps and prohibitions on certain fees.
A pipeline installation company serving the oil, gas and telecommunications industries has launched a racketeering lawsuit against its former CEO in New Jersey state court over an alleged scheme in which a subcontractor overbilled the business for its services to pay kickbacks to the onetime executive.
Sprint may be joining a partnership between Comcast and Charter to boost their wireless offerings, Bain Capital and Cinven may make another bid to buy Stada after the duo's €5.3 billion offer did not get approved, and Russia's largest shipping company will be taken private next month.
Huawei blasted T-Mobile’s request for more than $18.5 million in fees and costs on a $4.8 million jury verdict as “unreasonable” in Washington federal court on Monday after the Chinese handset maker was found partly liable in a suit over a concerted espionage campaign to glean the secrets behind a phone-testing robot.
A California federal judge on Monday rejected Qualcomm's request to dismiss the Federal Trade Commission's suit claiming the chipmaker illegally used its licensing agreements' key patents to monopolize the market.
A telecommunications contractor that had sought to recover more than $18 million it said it was owed has told the Ninth Circuit that a California federal judge was wrong to rule that the company wasn't properly licensed to dig trenches to install a fiber-optic cable network.
In December 2015, an amendment to Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was implemented with the intent of putting reasonable limits on civil discovery. The many subsequent cases that have applied the amended rules provide guideposts for litigants and practitioners, say Brandee Kowalzyk and Christopher Polston of Nelson Mullins LLP.
The simple practice of asking jurors important and substantive questions early can help make trial by jury a more reliable form of dispute resolution, say Stephen Susman, Richard Lorren Jolly and Dr. Roy Futterman of the NYU School of Law Civil Jury Project.
Considering both the actual exposure and ultimate result, U.S. v. Dish Network LLC starkly highlights the absolutely devastating penalties provided by the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the telemarketing sales rule. But the case is much more than a cautionary tale regarding the exorbitant monetary liability, say Jason Tompkins and Jonathan Hoffmann of Balch & Bingham LLP.
It was a privilege to spend a half-hour on the phone with the nation's foremost First Amendment lawyer. Floyd Abrams and I discussed his career, his new book and what he sees in his free-speech crystal ball. And he was a very good sport when I asked if it is constitutionally protected to yell inside a movie theater: “Citizens United is a terrible decision and should be set on fire,” says Randy Maniloff of White and Williams LLP.
Recent surveys show that law firms won't be able to rely on the flood of associates their business model demands as long as they require them to dedicate all day, most nights, every weekend and all holidays to firm business, says Jill Dessalines, founder of Strategic Advice for Successful Lawyers and former assistant GC at McKesson Corp.
Despite legal education training and the focus on logic and reason by the courts, lawyers address emotional issues on a daily basis — albeit more indirectly. But a shift to consciously and strategically addressing emotions gives us a powerful tool to help our clients reach faster, better decisions, say dispute resolution experts Robert Creo and Selina Shultz.
The guessing game around Justice Anthony Kennedy’s possible retirement is reaching a crescendo. Yet the speculation does more than fuel bookmakers’ odds. It draws attention to his pivotal role as the court’s swing vote, says Nan Aron, president of Alliance for Justice.
China's current judicial practices appear to indicate that standard-essential patent holders are in a favorable condition to commence relevant patent infringement litigation to protect legitimate rights and interests in China, say attorneys with Tian Yuan Law Firm.
One way to combat juror confusion and boredom is to allow jurors to ask witnesses questions. No federal evidentiary or court rule prohibits it, and every federal circuit court to address the practice has held it permissible, say Stephen Susman, Richard Lorren Jolly and Dr. Roy Futterman of the NYU School of Law Civil Jury Project.