Follow us on
Connect
More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News

Posts tagged Judge Denise Cote

Apple settles e-book anti-trust damages with states, class-action plaintiffs
June 17, 2014 | 5:49 am

Well, there’s a thing. Reuters reports that Apple has agreed to settle the e-book anti-trust lawsuit filed by 33 state attorneys general and class-action lawyers for consumers from other states. Details of the settlement have not been released; it still needs approval from the court. Judge Cote has ordered the complainants and Apple to submit a filing to seek approval of the settlement within 30 days. As I understand it, this renders the $840 million damages phase of the trial effectively moot. Apple is still going to fight the guilty verdict in the Department of Justice case, and the...

iBooks to be included with every iOS 8 device; will the DoJ take notice?
June 5, 2014 | 7:05 am

Apart from all the little features it’s swiping from Android (finally, widgets, custom keyboards, and cross-app sharing APIs!), the new iPhone OS 8 includes one little feature that Mark Coker of Smashwords believes will be a “game changer.” For the first time, iBooks will be bundled directly into every new iOS device sold. This might not seem like a big deal at first—iBooks has, after all, been available for four years to anyone who wants to download it—but never underestimate the laziness barrier. People who weren’t that “into” e-books might never have bothered to grab it on their...

Judge Cote awards patent troll victim legal fees under new Supreme Court precedent
June 2, 2014 | 4:50 am

Speaking of Judge Cote, turns out she’s got her head on straight in other ways than just the Apple trial. Ars Technica covers her ruling on a patent troll lawsuit, the first of its kind under a new Supreme Court precedent stating that patent trolls who lose their case can be required to pay the victor’s legal fees. Judge Cote didn’t give the troll victim, FindTheBest, everything it wanted—she threw out their attempt to file a RICO anti-extortion case against the troll—but she rejected the patent and declared that the legal fee award “will serve as an instrument of...

Appeals court rejects Apple request for stay of damages trial
June 2, 2014 | 4:11 am

Apple’s collected another appeal rejection the way some writers used to collect publisher rejection slips. The appeals court issued a terse decision saying that Apple hadn’t met the legal standard required for a stay, so it would not stay the damages phase of the trial while Apple appeals the guilty verdict. Appeals courts rarely ever explain their reasoning for these matters in detail, so all we can really say is that they didn’t find Apple’s argument convincing. The rejection paves the way for the trial to begin July 14, unless there are further administrative delays. The closest thing to...

States rights to damages bode ill for Apple
April 16, 2014 | 6:25 pm

AppleLegal developments around the Apple ebook price fixing debacle are not exactly going Cupertino's way. Most recently, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote, to no one's great surprise, returned a negative response to Apple's motion to dismiss the damage claims brought by 33 states of the Union in their previous parallel case alongside the U.S. Justice Department. According to Reuters, the damage claims from U.S. states could amount to some $840 million. "Apple now moves to dismiss the antitrust action filed by the States. Apple contends that the States lack standing to assert their claims against Apple or, at the very least,...

Judge Cote certifies consumer suits for class action in Apple antitrust case
March 29, 2014 | 7:45 am

Calling it a “paradigmatic antitrust class action,” Judge Denise Cote has granted class-action certification to the consumers whose suit against Apple makes up one third of the intricate bundle of cases she is presiding over in the Apple antitrust trial. (The other two thirds are, of course, the actions brought by the Department of Justice and the state attorneys general.) She also denied Apple’s request to disregard the plaintiff’s damage expert, and threw out the opinions of the experts Apple had consulted in regard to damages. Not many surprises there for anyone who’s been following the trial so far. ...

New developments in Apple anti-trust trial: Apple accuses Judge Cote of bias; economists file amicus brief
March 6, 2014 | 4:22 pm

Here’s a twofer of Apple anti-trust suit stories. First, from Andrew Albanese at Publishers Weekly comes the news that a February 21 Apple filing opposing summary judgment in the damages phase has been made public, and it’s pretty clear the gloves are off. Apple is outright accusing Judge Cote of bias, claiming that statements she made in the order denying the antitrust monitor stay suggest she’s already decided what the damages should be. I wish I could find the filing; it doesn’t seem to be in PACER. I’d love to read it for myself. I’m pretty sure this...

Apple files opening brief in e-book anti-trust trial appeal
February 26, 2014 | 7:12 pm

Ars Technica reports that Apple has filed a 75-page opening brief in its appeal of Judge Cote’s decision finding it guilty of engaging in a conspiracy with the publishers to help raise prices. The Ars article has a reasonable summary of Apple’s arguments. Fundamentally, many of them are the same arguments that lost it the case in trial court: it just negotiated the most favorable contract for itself, and couldn’t be blamed for what the publishers, busy little bees that they are, imposed on other retailers. It acted to increase competition by making it possible for new players...

Apple files motion to move anti-trust damages trials to California, Texas
February 25, 2014 | 9:53 am

Looks like Apple is doing whatever it can to flee from Judge Cote. Andrew Albanese reports at Publishers Weekly that Apple has filed a motion to split the state and class-action agency pricing lawsuits away from the Department of Justice trial and move them to districts in northern California and west Texas, respectively. It argues that they had only been consolidated for the purposes of pre-trial activity only, and now that said activity is over, they should get to move back to the districts where they had been filed. (I checked PACER but didn’t find any of these filings there...

Judge Cote assigns anti-trust monitor mediator, warns Apple against withholding documents
February 21, 2014 | 3:46 pm

The Apple anti-trust affair proceeds apace. In the wake of the appeals court decision allowing the monitor’s work to go ahead, Andrew Albanese reports at Publishers Weekly, Judge Cote has assigned a magistrate judge to act as a first-line mediator to resolve any disputes between Apple and anti-trust monitor Michael Bromwich, subject to appeal to her. (It’s the same magistrate, Michael Dolinger, who was also assigned to arbitrate the matter of Bromwich’s fee, so apparently his brief has been widened.) Cote also told Apple it needs to go ahead and fork over all the documents Bromwich requested by February 26th....

Appeals court denies Apple request to stay anti-trust monitor
February 11, 2014 | 11:23 am

The appeals court has issued its ruling on Apple’s request to have the anti-trust monitor stayed in the e-book price-fixing anti-trust trial. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Apple’s appeal has been denied. That being said, the appeals court did issue what it saw as instructions “narrowing” the monitor’s focus. The monitor is, the court said, supposed to make sure Apple has an anti-trust compliance program in place and that employees are being taught about what it means and how it works. He is not supposed to rummage around looking for violations of anti-trust or other laws. In the two-page document (PDF), court...

Appeals court exhibits healthy skepticism about all sides of Apple antitrust monitorship dispute
February 4, 2014 | 6:33 pm

One of the things that bemuses me about the Apple antitrust trial is the polarization you get from observers of the case. It seems like everyone (including, admittedly, me) either believes Amazon is a saint and Apple and the publishers are the devil, or vice versa. Nowhere is that more clear than in the coverage of the hearing today on whether to stay the external compliance monitorship. Depending on who you read, either “Apple gain[ed] no sympathy” at the hearing (WSJ, paywalled; get around it with Google News) or “The odds are in Apple’s favor today” (Fortune, with Apple partisan...