A federal appeals panel has refused to disqualify a court-appointed monitor after a judge found Apple colluded with book publishers in 2010 to raise electronic book prices.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled against Apple Inc. Thursday. The three-judge panel concluded that a judge did not act improperly when she declined Apple's request to disqualify a monitor she had appointed to evaluate Apple's antitrust policies.
A lawyer for Apple, based in Cupertino, California, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The 2nd Circuit did not yet rule on a separate appeal in which Apple is challenging the judge's finding that it colluded with publishers.
After a 2013 civil trial, a judge ordered the technology giant to modify contracts with publishers to prevent price fixing.
Thursday, May 28, 2015
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Swiss Bank UBS Pleading Guilty To Wire Fraud
Swiss bank UBS says it is pleading guilty to wire fraud and is paying $545 million to settle U.S. cases of market manipulation.
The bank said Wednesday that under the deal with U.S. authorities it will be granted conditional immunity from prosecution in a Department of Justice probe on the manipulation of foreign exchange rates. UBS AG said it was the first to report to the DOJ potential misconduct by banks in forex markets.
It will however pay a $342 million fine to the Federal Reserve.
It will separately pay a $203 million fine to the DOJ for manipulating a key market interest rate called the London Interbank Offered Rate.
The bank said "the conduct of a small number of employees was unacceptable and we have taken appropriate disciplinary actions."
Thursday, April 16, 2015
International Law Attorney - Schatkin Law
With over 25 years of experience, The Law Office of Andrew J. Schatkin has
successfully helped people in need of legal counsel and aid.
International law attorney Andrew Schatkin has graduated
from the top ranking law school, Villanova University, has received a
certificate in international law from Hague, and holds a diploma in
International human rights from Strasbourg. He is an expert in different areas
of international law, including but not limited to the following: international
employment, family, police brutality, and human rights matters.
Andrew Schatkin has authored two books and has plans for
four more books focusing on law, religion, and philosophy in the near future.
He has been listed in the reference publication, “Who’s Who in America, Who’s
Who in American law, and Who’s Who in the world” for his outstanding feats and
handling of both national and international cases.
The Law Office of Andrew J. Schatkin represents both
international businesses and clients and even offers translation/interpretation
services for all Spanish speaking clients.
Friday, April 3, 2015
5 arrested in protest inside Supreme Court
Protesters disrupted Supreme Court proceedings on Wednesday for the
second time this year with shouted criticism of the court's previous
rulings on campaign finance.
Supreme Court police swiftly removed five people from the courtroom after they rose, one after another, to interrupt the start of the court's session.
The advocacy group 99rise, which opposes the influence of money in elections, took responsibility for the protest, as it did for similar episodes in January and last year. The group said in a statement that six of its members took part Wednesday, though court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said only five people were arrested.
Arberg said all five have been charged under a law that prohibits making "a harangue or oration" or uttering "loud, threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court Building. They also were charged with conspiracy-related offenses and sent to a holding cell at Washington, D.C., police headquarters.
The first protester rose from his seat among spectators in the courtroom just after the justices took the bench at 10 a.m. "I rise to claim our democracy, one person, one vote," he said.
Chief Justice John Roberts initially joked that he didn't think the court's scheduled arguments in bankruptcy cases "would attract such attention." But Roberts turned serious as the protests continued and warned that anyone disrupting proceedings could be charged with criminal contempt.
In the two previous protests, at least one person from 99rise carried a camera and recorded the disruption in violation of the court's ban on cameras in the courtroom. The surreptitiously recorded video was later posted online.
The group said in a statement that the protest was tied to the one-year anniversary of the Supreme Court's ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC, in which the justices struck down the overall federal limit on individual campaign contributions. The anniversary is on Thursday, when the court will not be in session.
Supreme Court police swiftly removed five people from the courtroom after they rose, one after another, to interrupt the start of the court's session.
The advocacy group 99rise, which opposes the influence of money in elections, took responsibility for the protest, as it did for similar episodes in January and last year. The group said in a statement that six of its members took part Wednesday, though court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said only five people were arrested.
Arberg said all five have been charged under a law that prohibits making "a harangue or oration" or uttering "loud, threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court Building. They also were charged with conspiracy-related offenses and sent to a holding cell at Washington, D.C., police headquarters.
The first protester rose from his seat among spectators in the courtroom just after the justices took the bench at 10 a.m. "I rise to claim our democracy, one person, one vote," he said.
Chief Justice John Roberts initially joked that he didn't think the court's scheduled arguments in bankruptcy cases "would attract such attention." But Roberts turned serious as the protests continued and warned that anyone disrupting proceedings could be charged with criminal contempt.
In the two previous protests, at least one person from 99rise carried a camera and recorded the disruption in violation of the court's ban on cameras in the courtroom. The surreptitiously recorded video was later posted online.
The group said in a statement that the protest was tied to the one-year anniversary of the Supreme Court's ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC, in which the justices struck down the overall federal limit on individual campaign contributions. The anniversary is on Thursday, when the court will not be in session.
Playwright David Adjmi wins New York infringement court case
A playwright who was accused of copyright infringement by lawyers
representing the TV show "Three's Company" over his parody of 1970s
sitcoms has won a victory in court.
Loretta A. Preska, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, ruled Tuesday that David Adjmi, whose play "3C" had a run at Rattlestick Playwrights Theatre in 2012, is protected under the doctrine of fair use.
"The play is a highly transformative parody of the television series that, although it appropriates a substantial amount of 'Three's Company,' is a drastic departure from the original that poses little risk to the market for the original," the judge wrote, noting that copyright law "is designed to foster creativity."
Adjmi had the backing of many theater community heavyweights, including Jon Robin Baitz, Stephen Sondheim, Tony Kushner, John Guare and Terrence McNally.
The play is about two girls — one a tomboy, the other a sexy ditz — and a guy who spontaneously become roommates in a rundown Santa Monica apartment after a wild party.
They clash with a dislikable landlord who makes offensive, homophobic jokes. The playwright is exploring the idea of a culture avoiding difficult issues and problems by retreating into sex and drugs.
Loretta A. Preska, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, ruled Tuesday that David Adjmi, whose play "3C" had a run at Rattlestick Playwrights Theatre in 2012, is protected under the doctrine of fair use.
"The play is a highly transformative parody of the television series that, although it appropriates a substantial amount of 'Three's Company,' is a drastic departure from the original that poses little risk to the market for the original," the judge wrote, noting that copyright law "is designed to foster creativity."
Adjmi had the backing of many theater community heavyweights, including Jon Robin Baitz, Stephen Sondheim, Tony Kushner, John Guare and Terrence McNally.
The play is about two girls — one a tomboy, the other a sexy ditz — and a guy who spontaneously become roommates in a rundown Santa Monica apartment after a wild party.
They clash with a dislikable landlord who makes offensive, homophobic jokes. The playwright is exploring the idea of a culture avoiding difficult issues and problems by retreating into sex and drugs.
Thursday, February 19, 2015
High court must fix special prosecutor process, lawyers say
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, not known for being shy about defending
its prerogatives, has put itself in a curious situation.After months of
intrigue and court silence, the justices surprised Pennsylvania's legal
community by saying they would hear public arguments on Attorney General
Kathleen Kane's legal challenge to the court's self-appointed power to
launch special prosecutions.
The case in question is a court-ordered investigation into whether Kane's office illegally shared secret investigative material with the Philadelphia Daily News. The result was a grand jury's recommendation that Kane be charged with perjury and other offenses.
The justices may not ultimately agree with Kane that the courts lack the authority to appoint prosecutors to run grand juries or investigate her office. But, say lawyers and court watchers, the justices must at least clean up a murky and messy process that has been dogged by questions about legality and constitutionality.
The case in question is a court-ordered investigation into whether Kane's office illegally shared secret investigative material with the Philadelphia Daily News. The result was a grand jury's recommendation that Kane be charged with perjury and other offenses.
The justices may not ultimately agree with Kane that the courts lack the authority to appoint prosecutors to run grand juries or investigate her office. But, say lawyers and court watchers, the justices must at least clean up a murky and messy process that has been dogged by questions about legality and constitutionality.
Republicans welcome court decision in immigration lawsuit
House Speaker John Boehner says a federal judge's ruling temporarily
blocking President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration
underscores that he acted beyond his authority.
In a statement Tuesday, the Ohio Republican said the ruling by a Texas judge was no surprise, citing Obama's repeated comments about the limits of his authority. Boehner said he hoped that Senate Democrats will relent in their opposition to a Homeland Security Department spending bill that overturns Obama's actions to spare millions of immigrants from deportation.
The department's funding expires Feb. 27 and Congress has only a few legislative days to act.
Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said in a statement that he hoped Obama obeys the court's ruling. The Justice Department has said it would appeal.
In a statement Tuesday, the Ohio Republican said the ruling by a Texas judge was no surprise, citing Obama's repeated comments about the limits of his authority. Boehner said he hoped that Senate Democrats will relent in their opposition to a Homeland Security Department spending bill that overturns Obama's actions to spare millions of immigrants from deportation.
The department's funding expires Feb. 27 and Congress has only a few legislative days to act.
Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said in a statement that he hoped Obama obeys the court's ruling. The Justice Department has said it would appeal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)