cik
stringclasses
1 value
date
stringlengths
8
8
form
stringclasses
4 values
sentenceCount
int64
0
2.33k
sentence
stringlengths
2
5.25k
filename
stringlengths
40
40
0000320193
20071115
10-K
636
A Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint was filed on December 18, 2006, and a First Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint was filed on March 6, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
637
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on April 20, 2007, which was heard on September 7, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
638
On June 12, 2007, the Company's Board of Directors approved a resolution appointing a Special Litigation Committee to make all decisions relating to options litigation.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
639
In re Apple Computer, Inc.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
640
Derivative Litigation (formerly Plumbers and Pipefitters v. Jobs, et al.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
641
and Related Actions) (State Action); Boston Retirement Board v. Apple Computer, Inc. On July 5, 2006, a putative derivative action captioned Plumbers and Pipefitters v. Jobs, et.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
642
al., was filed in California Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
643
A number of related actions were filed in the subsequent weeks, and have been consolidated into a single action captioned In re Apple Computer, Inc.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
644
Derivative Litigation, No.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
645
1:06CV066692, assigned to the Hon.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
646
Joseph Huber.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
647
These actions purport to assert claims on behalf of the Company against several current and former executive officers and members of the Board of Directors alleging improper backdating of stock option grants to maximize certain defendants' profits, failing to properly account for and take tax deductions for those grant...
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
648
The Company is named as a nominal defendant.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
649
A consolidated complaint was filed on October 5, 2006, alleging a variety of causes of action under California law, including claims for unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of the California Corporations Code, abuse of control, accounting, constructive trust, rescission, deceit, gross mismanagement a...
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
650
On December 7, 2006, the Court granted the Company's motion to stay these actions.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
651
On November 3, 2006, the Boston Retirement Board, a purported shareholder, filed a petition for writ of mandate against the Company in California Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara County (Boston Retirement Board v. Apple Computer Inc.).
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
652
The petition sought to compel the Company to allow inspection of certain corporate records relating to the Company's option practices and the Special Committee's investigation.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
653
On January 16, 2007, the Company filed a demurrer to the petition.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
654
The Court entered an order overruling the demurrer on March 13, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
655
The Company filed its answer to the petition on April 5, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
656
The trial took place on September 24, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
657
The Court granted the petition for inspection but narrowed the scope of the records to be produced.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
658
In re Apple iPod Nano Products Liability Litigation (formerly Wimmer v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Moschella, et al., v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Calado, et al.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
659
v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Kahan, et al., v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Jennings, et al., v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Rappel v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Mayo v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Valencia v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Williamson v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Sioson v. Apple Computer, Inc. Beginning on October 19, 2005, eight complaints w...
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
660
The federal actions were coordinated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and assigned to the Hon.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
661
Ronald Whyte pursuant to an April 17, 2006 order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
662
Plaintiffs filed a First Consolidated and Amended Master Complaint on September 21, 2006, alleging violations of California and other states' consumer protection and warranty laws and claiming unjust enrichment.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
663
The Master Complaint alleges two putative plaintiff classes: (1) all U.S. residents (excluding California residents) who purchased an iPod nano that was not manufactured or designed using processes necessary to ensure normal resistance to scratching of the screen; and (2) all iPod nano purchasers other than U.S. reside...
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
664
The Company answered the Master Complaint on November 20, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
665
The two California State Court actions were coordinated on May 4, 2006, and assigned to the Hon.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
666
Carl West in Los Angeles Superior Court.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
667
Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint on June 8, 2006, alleging violations of California state consumer protection, unfair competition, false advertising and warranty laws and claiming unjust enrichment.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
668
The Consolidated Complaint alleges a putative plaintiff class of all California residents who own an iPod nano containing a manufacturing defect that results in the nano being susceptible to excessive scratching.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
669
The Company answered the Consolidated Amended Complaint on October 6, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
670
Two similar complaints, Carpentier v. Apple Canada, Inc., and Royer-Brennan v. Apple Computer, Inc. and Apple Canada, Inc. were filed in Montreal, Quebec, Canada on October 27, 2005 and November 9, 2005, respectively, seeking authorization to institute class actions on behalf of iPod nano purchasers in Quebec.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
671
The Royer-Brennan file was stayed in May 2006 in favor of the Carpentier file.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
672
A similar complaint, Mund v. Apple Canada Inc. and Apple Computer, Inc., was filed in Ontario, Canada on January 9, 2006 seeking authorization to institute a class action on behalf of iPod nano purchasers in Canada.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
673
Apple Canada Inc. and Apple Computer, Inc. have served Notices of Intent to Defend.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
674
Individual Networks, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
675
Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on April 24, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
676
7,117,516, entitled "Method and System for Providing a Customized Media List."
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
677
Plaintiff alleges certain features of the iTunes store infringe the patent.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
678
The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
679
The Company filed an answer on July 2, 2007, denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
680
The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of noninfringement and invalidity, as well as a counterclaim against Individual Networks LLC for infringement of U.S. Patent No.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
681
5,724,567.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
682
The Markman hearing is set for October 8, 2008, and trial is scheduled for November 9, 2009.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
683
Intertainer, Inc. v. Apple Computer, Inc., et al.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
684
Plaintiff filed this action on December 29, 2006 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement by the Company and others of U.S. Patent number 6,925,469 entitled "Digital Entertainment Service Platform."
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
685
The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
686
The Company filed an answer on February 21, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
687
The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of noninfringement and invalidity.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
688
Lenzi v. Apple Canada, Inc.; Wolfe v. Apple Computer, Inc. and Apple Canada, Inc.; Hirst v. Apple Canada, Inc.; Hamilton v. Apple Computer, Inc. and Apple Canada, Inc.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
689
Plaintiff filed a purported class action on June 7, 2005, in Superior Court, in Montreal, Quebec, Canada allegedly on behalf of Quebec customers claiming false advertising and breach of warranty relating to iPod battery life.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
690
Plaintiff sought authorization to institute a class action on behalf of Generations 1, 2 and 3 iPod owners in Quebec.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
691
On February 2, 2006, the Court dismissed plaintiff's motion for authorization to institute a class action.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
692
Plaintiff has appealed this ruling.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
693
Two similar complaints relative to iPod battery life, Wolfe v. Apple and Hirst v. Apple, were filed in Toronto, Ontario, Canada on August 15, 2005 and September 12, 2005, respectively.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
694
Counsel subsequently amended the complaint, now called Waddell vs. Apple.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
695
The Waddell lawsuit is brought on behalf of all Canadian purchasers other than Quebec purchasers.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
696
On January 17, 2006, the Company filed its statement of defence to the Waddell complaint.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
697
In addition, a similar complaint regarding iPod battery life, Hamilton v. Apple Computer, Inc. and Apple Canada, Inc. was filed in Calgary, Alberta, Canada on October 5, 2005, purportedly on behalf of all purchasers of iPods in Alberta, Canada.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
698
The complaint was served on September 27, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
699
The Company has reached a settlement of this matter and the parties have requested preliminary court approval for the settlement.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
700
Settlement of this matter will not have a material effect on the Company's financial condition or operating results.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
701
Macadam v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Santos v. Apple Computer, Inc. (Santa Clara County Superior Court) The Macadam action was filed in late 2002 asserting various causes of action including breach of contract, fraud, negligent and intentional interference with economic relationship, negligent misrepresentation, trade libe...
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
702
The complaint requested unspecified damages and other relief.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
703
The Company filed an answer on December 3, 2004 denying all allegations and asserting numerous defenses.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
704
On October 1, 2003, Macadam was deauthorized as an Apple reseller.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
705
Macadam filed a motion for a temporary order to reinstate it as a reseller, which the Court denied.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
706
The Court denied Macadam's motion for a preliminary injunction on December 19, 2003.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
707
On December 6, 2004, Macadam filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the Northern District of California, which placed a stay on the litigation as to Macadam.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
708
The Company filed a claim in the bankruptcy proceedings on February 16, 2005.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
709
The Macadam bankruptcy case was converted to Chapter 7 (liquidation) on April 29, 2005.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
710
The Company has reached a settlement of Macadam's claims against the Company with the Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Trustee.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
711
The Bankruptcy Court approved the settlement on July 17, 2006 over the objection of Tom Santos, Macadam's principal.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
712
Santos appealed the ruling approving the settlement, but the district court denied the appeal.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
713
Santos has appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
714
On December 19, 2005, Tom Santos filed a Fifth Amended Complaint on his own behalf (not on behalf of Macadam) alleging fraud, violations of California Business & Professions Code §17200 (unfair competition), California Business & Professions Code §17500 (false advertising) and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
715
The Company filed a demurrer to Santos' amended complaint and a special motion to strike the defamation cause of action on January 20, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
716
The Court sustained the demurrer in part but denied the special motion to strike.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
717
Santos filed a Sixth Amended Complaint on July 14, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
718
The Company filed a demurrer, which was granted on September 9, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
719
Santos filed a Seventh Amended Complaint in late September, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
720
The Company filed a motion to strike, which was granted in part and denied in part on December 15, 2006.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
721
Santos filed an Eighth Amended Complaint on January 29, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
722
The Company filed a demurrer, which was heard on May 7, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
723
The court sustained the demurrer, and Santos filed a Ninth Amended Complaint on July 11, 2007.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
724
The Company filed a demurrer, which was overruled.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
725
The Company also filed a cross complaint against Santos on January 20, 2006 alleging violations of California Business & Professions Code §17200 and California Penal Code §502, fraud and deceit and breach of contract.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
726
Mediostream, Inc. v. Acer America Corp. et al.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
727
Plaintiff filed this action against the Company, Acer America Corp., Dell, Inc. and Gateway, Inc. on August 28, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
728
7,009,655, entitled "Method and System for Direct Recording of Video Information onto a Disk Medium."
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
729
The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
730
The Company's response to the complaint is not yet due.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
731
OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
732
Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
733
5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled "Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses."
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
734
The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt
0000320193
20071115
10-K
735
The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses.
0001047469-07-009340/full-submission.txt