Apple asks appeals court to overturn $502 mln verdict in VPN patent case

Apple asks appeals court to overturn $502 mln verdict in VPN patent case

The Apple logo is seen at an Apple Store in Brooklyn, New York, U.S. October 23, 2020. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegister

  • Judge says Apple brought damages argument too late in VirnetX case
  • Apple could still win if PTO patent-validity ruling stands

(Reuters) – A long-running dispute between Apple Inc and patent licensing company VirnetX Inc over privacy-software technology went back to a U.S. appeals court on Thursday for a panel of judges to hear Apple’s new challenges to a $502 million jury loss in Texas.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard Apple’s request to toss the jury verdict, as well as VirnetX’s appeal of a U.S. Patent Office tribunal decision to cancel its virtual private network (VPN) patents that also would negate the award if it stands.The 12-year fight has included five trials and three trips to the appeals court.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegister“I’m pretty sure this dispute will never end between these two companies,” Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore said during Thursday oral arguments.VirnetX sued Apple in 2010, alleging that VPN technology in Apple’s iPhones, iPads and computers infringed its patents. After several trials and appeals, a jury awarded VirnetX $502 million in damages in 2020.Apple’s attorney Bill Lee of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr argued Thursday that the verdict should be thrown out because the jury’s royalty rate was based on flawed calculations by VirnetX’s damages expert.Lee said there was no evidence that any Apple customers used VirnetX’s patented technology, which is “disabled by default” in Apple’s software, and that the calculation failed to take this into account.But Moore said Apple brought the argument too late, even though it was “very simple and persuasive.””That argument was sitting there to be made as part of your last appeal, and you didn’t make it,” Moore said.Both Lee and VirnetX’s attorney Jeff Lamken of MoloLamken acknowledged that Apple would win the case if Patent Trial and Appeal Board rulings invalidating VirnetX’s patents are upheld. VirnetX asked the Federal Circuit to overturn the PTAB decisions in a separate oral argument Thursday.VirnetX attorney Stephen Kinnaird of Paul Hastings argued that the board misinterpreted the patents.Moore sat on the panels in both cases with Circuit Judges Leonard Stark and Todd Hughes.VirnetX separately won $440 million from Apple on allegations that the tech giant used its internet-security technology in features like FaceTime video calls, which Apple said it has paid.The appeals are VirnetX Inc v. Apple Inc, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 21-1672 and VirnetX Inc v Mangrove Partners Master Fund Ltd, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 20-2271.For Apple: Bill Lee of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and DorrFor VirnetX: Jeff Lamken of MoloLamken; Stephen Kinnaird of Paul HastingsRead more:Apple fails to overturn VirnetX patent verdict, could owe over $1.1 billionVirnetX patent win against Apple vacated by U.S. appeals courtRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.Blake BrittainThomson ReutersBlake Brittain reports on intellectual property law, including patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. Reach him at [email protected] .

AppLovin offers to buy video game software maker Unity in $17.5 bln deal

AppLovin offers to buy video game software maker Unity in $17.5 bln deal

People play “Pokemon GO” on the Pokequan GoBoat Adventure Cruise in the Occoquan River in the small town of Occoquan, Virginia, U.S. August 14, 2016. REUTERS/Sait Serkan GurbuzRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterAug 9 (Reuters) – Gaming software company AppLovin Corp (APP.O) made an offer on Tuesday to buy its peer Unity Software Inc (U.N) in a $17.54 billion all-stock deal, threatening to derail Unity’s announced plan to acquire AppLovin’s smaller competitor ironSource .AppLovin has offered $58.85 for each Unity share, which represents a premium of 18% to Unity’s Monday closing price. Unity will own 55% of the combined company’s outstanding shares, representing about 49% of the voting rights.AppLovin hired advisors to work out an offer after Unity last month said it would buy ironSource in a $4.4 billion all-stock transaction, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters. Unity’s board will have to terminate the ironSource deal if it wants to pursue a combination with AppLovin, according to the proposal.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterUnder the proposed deal, Unity’s Chief Executive John Riccitiello will become CEO of the combined business, while AppLovin Chief Executive Adam Foroughi will take the role of chief operating officer.Unity said its board would evaluate the offer. The company is slated to report its earnings after the bell on Tuesday.Both companies make software used to design video games. Game-making software has also been expanding to new technologies such as the so-called metaverse, or immersive virtual worlds.Unity’s software has been used to build some of the most-played games such as “Call of Duty: Mobile,” and “Pokemon Go”, while AppLovin provides helps developers to grow and monetize their apps.AppLovin’s offer comes as game developers and console makers warn of a slowdown in the sector as decades-high inflation and easing of COVID-19 restrictions lead gamers to pick outdoor activities. The company lowered its sales guidance on Tuesday.”The deal comes as surprise to everybody in the business,” said Serkan Toto, founder of game industry consultancy Kantan Games. “It’s a $15 billion company going after a $15 billion company. It’s a desperate attempt to consolidate and the chances of this deal happening are very slim.”Shares of Palo Alto, California-based AppLovin, which went public last year, fell 9.9% while those of Unity rose 1% in the morning trading session. Shares of ironSource were down 9.7%.Foroughi said the combined company will have the potential to generate an adjusted operating profit of over $3 billion by the end of 2024.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterReporting by Eva Mathews and Nivedita Balu in Bengaluru, Krystal Hu in New York; Editing by Saumyadeb Chakrabarty and Mike HarrisonOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. .

FDA regulation of premium cigars ‘arbitrary and capricious,’ judge finds

FDA regulation of premium cigars ‘arbitrary and capricious,’ judge finds

  • Judge finds agency ignored evidence in deeming premium cigars subject to same law as cigarettes
  • Cigar groups, FDA will submit briefs on remedy

(Reuters) – The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s decision to regulate premium cigars under the same federal law as other tobacco products like cigarettes was arbitrary and capricious, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C., said the agency had ignored relevant data about the health risks of premium cigar use. He asked the FDA and the industry groups challenging the regulations — the Premium Cigar Association and Cigar Rights of America — to submit briefs on whether he should vacate the FDA’s decision or simply remand the matter back to the agency.”The family-owned manufacturers and retailers that make and sell premium cigars have long believed the FDA mishandled its decision to regulate premium cigars,” said Michael Edney of Steptoe & Johnson, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. “We are grateful for the court’s decision and the opportunity for further proceedings in this matter.”Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterThe FDA could not immediately be reached for comment.The litigation focuses on the so-called Deeming Rule adopted by the agency in 2016, in which it identified a wide range of tobacco products, including premium cigars, to be subject to its regulatory authority along with cigarettes under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.The plaintiffs said that the agency considered, and rejected, a carve-out for premium cigars, both before adopting the final rule and again in 2017 and 2018 when it solicited additional comments.They said FDA rules requiring cigar makers to register their products annually and provide ingredient lists for each product, and requiring all products be submitted for laboratory testing, were impractical for hand-made, “artisan” premium cigars.The industry groups said that, unlike cigarettes and e-cigarettes, premium cigars do not appeal to young people and are not associated with addiction. They cited studies showing that young people are unlikely to use premium cigars, that users of premium cigars are unlikely to smoke them frequently and that infrequent cigar use is not associated with increased mortality.Mehta on Monday agreed that the FDA had not adequately considered the studies cited by the plaintiffs, instead asserting that there was “no evidence” that premium cigars were less harmful without directly addressing them.”Where, as here, an agency speaks in absolute terms that there is no evidence, it acts arbitrarily and capriciously when there is in fact pertinent record evidence and the agency ignores or overlooks it,” the judge wrote.The case is Cigar Association of America v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, No. 16-cv-01460.For Premium Cigar Association and Cigar Rights of America: Michael Edney of Steptoe & JohnsonFor FDA: Garrett Coyle of the U.S. Department of JusticeRead more:Premium tobacco cos tell judge FDA rules don’t apply to artisan productsMedical associations back FDA in lawsuit over premium cigar rulesRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterReporting By Brendan Pierson in New YorkOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.Brendan PiersonThomson ReutersBrendan Pierson reports on product liability litigation and on all areas of health care law. He can be reached at [email protected]. .

Levi Strauss to reimburse abortion travel for employees

Levi Strauss to reimburse abortion travel for employees

May 4 (Reuters) – Levi Strauss & Co said on Wednesday it will reimburse travel expenses for its full- and part-time employees who need to travel to another state for health care services, including abortions.The apparel company best known for its jeans is the latest U.S. company to offer the benefit as various states clamp down on access to abortions.And now, the U.S. Supreme Court looks set to vote to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide, according to a leaked initial draft majority opinion published by Politico on Monday. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegister“Given what is at stake, business leaders need to make their voices heard and act to protect the health and well-being of our employees. That means protecting reproductive rights,” the company said in a statement.Other companies have pledged to offer similar support to their U.S. employees who need to travel out of states like Texas and Oklahoma that have restricted access to abortion services.Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O), the second-largest U.S. private employer, on Monday told employees it will pay up to $4,000 in travel expenses yearly for non-life threatening medical treatments, among them elective abortions. read more Crowd-sourced review platform Yelp, Inc (YELP.N) said it will start in May to cover expenses for its employees and their dependents who need to travel to another state for abortion services. read more One of the leading Hollywood talent agencies, UTA, said it would reimburse travel expenses related to receiving women’s reproductive health services that are not accessible in an employee’s state of residence.”We’re doing this to support the right to choose that has been a bedrock of settled law for almost half a century,” Jeremy Zimmer, UTA’s chief executive, wrote in a staff memo Wednesday that was seen by Reuters.Citigroup Inc (C.N) became in March the first major U.S. bank to make a similar commitment. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterReporting by Doyinsola Oladipo; Dawn Chmielewski in Los Angeles; Editing by Anna Driver, Alexandra Hudson, Kirsten DonovanOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. .

Cash will now expedite your work permit, in new Biden immigration rule

Cash will now expedite your work permit, in new Biden immigration rule

  • Applicants for work permits can pay $1,500 to speed up process
  • Revenue will ease massive backlogs at immigration agency

(Reuters) – The Biden administration on Tuesday released a final rule expanding a program that allows applicants for various employment-related immigration benefits to pay up to $2,500 to speed up the process, in a bid to ease massive backlogs at the agency.The rule from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) extends the existing “premium processing” service to applications for an Employment Authorization Document, which allows recipients to work in the U.S. while they seek asylum or other legal status.About 2 million people apply for new or renewed work permits each year, according to USCIS data. The process typically takes five to seven months, leaving many immigrants unable to support themselves and their families in the meantime.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterUnder Tuesday’s rule, which takes effect in 60 days, individuals seeking work permits can pay $1,500 to have their applications considered within 30 days. The premium fee ranges up to $2,500 for applications for other kinds of employment-related adjustments in legal status.USCIS said it plans to phase in the expansion so that it will not negatively impact applicants who do not pay a premium fee. The backlog at USCIS grew to 9.5 million cases last month as the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated an existing bottleneck at the agency.The agency also said it will have to hire and train new staff to expand premium processing in line with the new rule, which it plans to pay for using revenue from current applications for premium processing.USCIS is funded primarily through the fees paid by applicants for various immigration benefits. The agency on Tuesday estimated it would collect an additional $9.7 million in fees per year under the new rule.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.Daniel WiessnerDan Wiessner (@danwiessner) reports on labor and employment and immigration law, including litigation and policy making. He can be reached at [email protected]. .