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 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 923 | The trial court issued the disqualification order on May 12, 2005. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 924 | On May 9, 2005 Plaintiff substituted new counsel. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 925 | The Company has obtained an opinion on the tax issue from the State Board of Equalization. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 926 | The parties have reached a settlement and the matter is concluded. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 927 | Settlement of this case did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operation. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 928 | Clark v. Apple Computer, Inc. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 929 | Plaintiff filed this purported class action on February 2, 2005 in Santa Clara County Superior Court alleging defects in the Company’s “yo-yo” power adapters. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 930 | Plaintiffs requested unspecified damages and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 931 | The parties reached a tentative settlement in this matter. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 932 | The Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement on April 19, 2005 and on January 10, 2006, the Court gave final approval of the settlement. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 933 | The matter is concluded. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 934 | Settlement of this matter did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operation. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 935 | Compression Labs, Inc. v. Apple Computer, Inc., et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 936 | ; Apple v. Compression Labs, Inc., et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 937 | Plaintiff Compression Labs, Inc. filed this patent infringement action on April 22, 2004 against the Company and twenty-seven other defendants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. patent 4,698,672 (the ‘672 patent). | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 938 | Plaintiff alleges that the Company infringes the patent by complying with the JPEG standard as defined by CCITT Recommendation T.81 entitled “Information Technology-Digital Compression and Coding of Continuous Tone Still Images-Requirements and Guidelines.” Plaintiff seeks unspecified damages and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 939 | On July 2, 2004, the Company and several other defendants in the Texas action filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court in Delaware against Compression Labs, Inc. and two other companies, requesting a declaratory judgment of non-infringement, invalidity, implied license, and unenforceability with respect to t... | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 940 | Additional actions regarding this patent have been filed in other jurisdictions. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 941 | On February 16, 2005, the Panel on Multi-District Litigation (MDL) granted a petition filed by certain defendants, seeking coordination and transfer of all of these cases to one court for pre-trial proceedings. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 942 | The MDL Panel has transferred all of the cases to the Northern District of California. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 943 | The defendants in the Texas and Delaware actions had filed motions to dismiss prior to the transfer and both motions are still pending. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 944 | A Markman hearing is set for February 13, 2006. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 945 | Contois Music Technology LLC v. Apple Computer, Inc. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 946 | Plaintiff Contois Music Technology (“Contois”) filed this action on June 13, 2005 in the United States District Court for Vermont, alleging infringement by the Company of U.S. Patent No. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 947 | 5,864,868, entitled “Computer Control System and User Interface for Media Playing Devices.” The complaint, which was served on October 4, 2005, seeks
unspecified damages and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 948 | The Company filed an answer on November 23, 2005 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 949 | Craft v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed December 23, 2003, Santa Clara County Superior Court); Chin v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed December 23, 2003, San Mateo County Superior Court); Hughes v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed December 23, 2003, Santa Clara County Superior Court); Westley v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed Decembe... | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 950 | The complaints include causes of action for violation of California Business and Professions Code §17200 (unfair competition), the Consumer Legal Remedies Action and claims for false advertising, fraudulent concealment, and breach of warranty. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 951 | The complaints sought unspecified damages and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 952 | The cases were consolidated in San Mateo County and Plaintiffs thereafter filed a consolidated complaint. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 953 | On August 25, 2004, the Company filed an answer denying all allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 954 | A similar complaint relative to iPod battery life, Mosley v. Apple Computer, Inc., was filed in Westchester County, New York on June 23, 2004 alleging violations of New York General Business Law Sections 349 (unfair competition) and 350 (false advertising). | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 955 | This case was stayed. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 956 | The parties reached a tentative settlement of all cases, and the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement on May 20, 2005. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 957 | The court entered an order granting final approval to the settlement on August 25, 2005. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 958 | An appeal challenging the trial court’s approval of the settlement was filed on October 24, 2005, but was subsequently withdrawn. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 959 | The settlement is now final. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 960 | Settlement of this matter will not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 961 | A similar complaint related to the iPod battery life, Lenzi v. Apple Canada, Inc. was filed in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, on June 7, 2005, seeking authorization to institute a class action on behalf of Generations 1, 2 and 3 iPod owners in Quebec. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 962 | On February 2, 2006, the Court dismissed plaintiff’s motion for authorization to institute a class action (motion for certification). | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 963 | 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. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 964 | Both actions define the purported class as a national class consisting of all persons in Canada who have purchased or who own an iPod. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 965 | A motion for certification of the class proceeding has been scheduled for the Spring of 2006. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 966 | Davis v. Apple Computer, Inc. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 967 | Plaintiff filed this purported class action in San Francisco County Superior Court on December 5, 2002, alleging that the Company engaged in unfair and deceptive business practices relating to its AppleCare Extended Service and Warranty Plan. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 968 | Plaintiff asserts causes of action for violation of California Business & Professions Code §17200 (unfair competition), California Business & Professions Code §17500 (false advertising), breach of the Song-Beverly Warranty Act, intentional misrepresentation and concealment. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 969 | Plaintiff requests unspecified damages and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 970 | The Company filed a demurrer and motion to strike which were granted, in part, and Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 971 | The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2003 denying all allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 972 | Plaintiff subsequently amended its complaint. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 973 | On October 29, 2003, the Company filed a motion to disqualify Plaintiff’s counsel in his role as counsel to the purported class and to the general public. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 974 | The Court granted the motion but allowed Plaintiff to retain substitute counsel. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 975 | Plaintiff did engage new counsel for the general public, but not for the class. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 976 | The Company moved to disqualify Plaintiff’s new counsel and to have the Court dismiss the general public claims for equitable relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 977 | The Court declined to disqualify Plaintiff’s new counsel or to dismiss the equitable claims, but did confirm that the class action claims are dismissed. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 978 | The Company appealed the ruling and the case was stayed pending the outcome of the appeal. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 979 | The Court of Appeal denied the appeal on August 17, 2005, affirming the trial court’s decision. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 980 | The Company filed a Petition for review with the California Supreme Court, which was denied on November 23, 2005. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 981 | European Commission Investigation
The European Commission has notified the Company that it is investigating certain matters relating to the iTunes Music Store in the European Union (EU). | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 982 | The European Commission is investigating claims made by Which?, a United Kingdom (UK) consumer association, that the Company is violating EU competition law by charging more
for online music in the UK than in Eurozone countries and preventing UK consumers from purchasing online music from the iTunes Music Store for Eur... | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 983 | The Which? | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 984 | claims were originally lodged with the UK Office of Fair Trading, which subsequently referred them to the European Commission. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 985 | The European Commission is investigating the charges under Articles 81 and 82 of the European Commission Treaty. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 986 | Gillis et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 987 | v. Apple Computer, Inc. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 988 | Plaintiffs filed this purported class action on December 23, 2005 in San Diego County Superior Court alleging that the Company has misrepresented the hard drive capacity of two Powerbook G4 computers: the 12 inch, 1.5 GHz computer with 512 MB of memory and a 100GB hard drive; and the 15 inch, 1.67 GHz computer with 1GB... | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 989 | Plaintiffs allege that the Company’s standard disclosure on its packaging regarding hard drive size was not present on the packaging for these two models. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 990 | The complaint alleges violations of the California Business & Profession Code sections §17200 (unfair competition), California Business & Profession Code §17500 (false advertising), the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and causes of action for deceit and negligent misrepresentation. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 991 | Plaintiffs seek restitution and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 992 | The Company’s response is not yet due. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 993 | Gobeli Research Ltd. v. Apple Computer, Inc., et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 994 | Plaintiff Gobeli Research Ltd. filed this patent infringement action against the Company and Sun Microsystems, Inc. on April 15, 2004 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. patent 5,418,968 related to a “System and Method of Controlling In... | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 995 | Plaintiff sought unspecified damages and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 996 | The Company filed an answer on June 9, 2004, denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 997 | The Company also asserted counterclaims requesting declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 998 | A Markman hearing took place August 9, 2005, and the Court issued a ruling on August 26, 2005 invalidating one of Plaintiff’s two claims. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 999 | On October 18, 2005, a Stipulation entered into by the parties was filed removing Mac OS 9 from the case. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,000 | The case settled and was dismissed on January 13, 2006. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,001 | Settlement of this matter did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,002 | Goldberg, et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,003 | v. Apple Computer, Inc., et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,004 | (f.k.a. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,005 | “Dan v. Apple Computer, Inc.”)
Plaintiffs filed this purported class action on September 22, 2003 in Los Angeles County Superior Court against the Company and other members of the computer industry on behalf of an alleged nationwide class of purchasers of certain computer hard drives. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,006 | The case alleges violations of California Business and Professions Code §17200 (unfair competition), the Consumer Legal Remedies Act and false advertising related to the size of the drives. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,007 | Plaintiffs allege that calculation of hard drive size using the decimal method misrepresents the actual size of the drive. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,008 | The complaint seeks restitution and other relief. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,009 | Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on March 30, 2004 and the Company filed an answer on September 23, 2004, denying all allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,010 | Defendants filed a motion to strike portions of the complaint based on sales by resellers and filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings based upon Proposition 64. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,011 | The Court granted both motions at a hearing on April 6, 2005. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,012 | Plaintiff thereafter filed an amended complaint on May 6, 2005. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,013 | The Defendants filed a demurrer on June 6, 2005, which was heard on August 22, 2005. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,014 | The Court granted the demurrer in part and denied it in part. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,015 | Plaintiff filed an amended complaint and the Company filed an answer on December 15, 2005 denying all allegations and asserting numerous assertive defenses. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,016 | Honeywell International, Inc., et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,017 | v. Apple Computer, Inc., et al. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,018 | Plaintiffs Honeywell International, Inc. and Honeywell Intellectual Properties, Inc. filed this action on October 6, 2004 in the United States District Court in Delaware alleging infringement by the Company and other defendants of U.S. patent 5,280,371 entitled “Directional Diffuser for a Liquid Crystal Display.” Plain... | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,019 | The Company filed an answer on December 21, 2004 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,020 | The Company has tendered the case to several suppliers. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,021 | On May 18, 2005 the Court stayed the case against the Company and the other supplier defendants. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
0000320193 | 20060203 | 10-Q | 1,022 | Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on November 7, 2005 adding additional defendants and expanding the scope of the accused products. | 0001104659-06-005910/full-submission.txt |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.