An app developer’s May 17 complaint alleging Apple violations of the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act by monopolizing the distribution of apps through the App Store was assigned Monday to U.S. District Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong in Oakland, the third judge to handle the case after the first two recused themselves. Thomas Reilly said he spent $150,000 developing Konverti, a currency exchange app for the remaining petty cash travelers have when returning home from foreign destinations. Konverti was approved and placed in the App Store in June 2017 “and abruptly removed weeks later without clear cause given,” said Reilly’s complaint. “Apple’s anti-competitive conduct forecloses all potential competitors from entering” the app distribution market, facing “no constraints” on its monopoly power, it said. Apple didn’t comment Monday.
An Illinois court denied Clearview AI’s motion to dismiss a privacy lawsuit alleging the company’s facial recognition technology violated people’s privacy. The American Civil Liberties Union and others said the company violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) (see 2005280032). “This case touches on matters of significant public interest,” Illinois Circuit Court in Cook County Judge Pamela McLean Meyerson wrote Friday. The complaint can’t be dismissed on jurisdictional grounds because Clearview targeted Illinois customers, the judge said. She disagreed with Clearview that BIPA doesn’t apply to face-prints. Clearview’s dormant Commerce Clause argument -- that BIPA can’t be applied because it would control the company’s conduct outside Illinois -- “would reward reckless disregard of the law in blind deference to technology,” she said. The judge disagreed that BIPA violates the First Amendment, saying BIPA restrictions on Clearview’s free speech “are no greater than what’s essential to further Illinois’ interest in protecting its citizens’ privacy and security.” The judge said Friday’s decision doesn’t mean the court found Clearview liable for violating BIPA but that the court has jurisdiction and the complaint “states a cause of action for which relief may be granted.” ACLU praised the ruling. “Without regulations like BIPA, companies like Clearview could end privacy as we know it,” said Vera Eidelman, staff attorney-ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. “This ruling protects our clients’ rights, and sends a strong message to lawmakers across the country that they can protect privacy without running afoul of the First Amendment.” Clearview AI didn't comment by our deadline.
A Bellevue, Washington, man pleaded guilty Wednesday to charges he netted more than $1.5 million in profits from insider trading of Netflix stock, said DOJ. Junwoo Chon, 50, is one of four men charged in the scheme that allegedly involved two former Netflix software engineers illegally providing proprietary subscriber data in advance of Netflix’s quarterly earnings announcements, said DOJ. Chon is scheduled for sentencing Dec. 3 before U.S. District Judge Richard Jones in Seattle. Efforts to reach Chon’s attorneys for comment Thursday were unsuccessful.
The U.S. Court of International Trade scheduled a status conference in the Section 301 litigation for 10 a.m. Sept. 1, in an order Wednesday. That's two days before Customs and Border Protection is required to create a repository for importers to request liquidation suspensions of customs entries from China with Lists 3 or 4A tariff exposure. The court has extended the deadline three times since ordering CBP to establish the repository in its July 6 preliminary injunction order (see 2108170027). The plaintiffs’ steering committee and DOJ negotiated agreements on some previously contested terms for setting up the repository, but are still far apart on others.
"Google Search is not a common carrier of anything under Ohio law or otherwise,” Google told a state court Friday. The state asked the Common Pleas Court in Delaware County to find Google is a carrier and public utility (see 2106080056). The court should dismiss the case because Ohio failed to state a claim for relief, said Google, seeking a one-hour hearing. Asking to declare Google a common carrier or public utility for the reason that it's most Ohioans' preferred search service "has no more validity under the law than a request to declare Fox News, the New York Times, or Walmart a 'public utility' because most people in a particular town prefer to get their news or groceries from them instead of someone else,” the search engine said: Google responds to user queries with information and doesn’t transport queries, and it’s not a carrier of information on a results page "because it is not hired by others to display the links to their webpages in its search results.” Google search isn’t an essential service, and neither it nor its competitors ever faced regulations controlling "the relation between the business and the public as its customers, such as those that prevent unfair rates and denial of service," said Google: Under Ohio Supreme Court precedent, absence of such rules prevents courts from declaring the search engine a public utility. Free speech bans Ohio courts from regulating how Google search responds to user queries, it added. Google said it’s premature to consider Ohio’s motion to bifurcate two counts from its complaint (see 2106170055).
Oral arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in September and October will remain remote, using Zoom for Government, rather than be conducted in person, Clerk Mark Langer said in a notice Friday, citing COVID-19 pandemic health guidance. He said the court will continue to provide an audio feed from oral arguments via the court's YouTube channel.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit altered its protocols for in-person arguments starting with the September court sitting and continuing indefinitely, requiring masks in the National Courts Building, the court said Thursday. Those not fully vaccinated must also observe social distancing, it added. Only counsel "and no more than one attendee whose presence is necessary to assist or supervise arguing counsel are permitted access" to the courtroom, it said. Non-vaccinated people can't enter the courthouse if they tested positive for COVID-19 within the past 14 days, are awaiting COVID test results, have traveled internationally in the past 14 days, are showing any COVID symptoms or had close contact with anyone diagnosed with COVID in the previous 14 days, it said. The Federal Circuit also updated its health and safety certification for in-person arguments, required on the day of the proceedings, and its certification of compliance with the revised protocols for in-person arguments, required ahead of the arguments by all arguing counsel.
Microsoft agreed to produce documents from 18 current and former employees that are potentially relevant to DOJ’s antitrust case against Google, the companies said in a joint status report filed (in Pacer) Friday in docket 1:20-cv-03010 (see 2107300035). Google, in a July 27 subpoena, accused Microsoft of stalling in producing relevant documents. They concern Microsoft’s search engine Bing and competition with Google. At the direction of the court, Microsoft filed a joint status report with Google, saying it will include documents from 18 “additional custodians,” in addition to the 27 it previously reported. The two sides agreed to address any further disputes in filings by Aug. 27 and at an Aug. 31 conference.
A judge asked if district court proceedings should be stayed until the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules on Florida's appeal of a preliminary injunction against the state's social media law. Parties should respond by Aug. 18 in case 21-cv-00220-RH-MAF, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Hinkle ruled Wednesday. Hinkle set trial for June 6 next year after discovery wraps Feb. 7. Florida wanted until May for discovery (see 2108030053).
Best Buy bilked six entrepreneurs out of $2.65 million through its participation in a “fraudulent scheme,” inducing them to invest in “sham businesses that supposedly provided delivery and installation services to Best Buy, but in reality, did no such thing and were actually part of a Ponzi scheme,” alleged a complaint (in Pacer) Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Newark, New Jersey. Best Buy “validated these potential investments by twice providing private guided tours of its restricted New Jersey distribution center” to the entrepreneurs, “during which many Best Buy employees corroborated all of the investment’s sales pitch,” it said. “Armed with Best Buy’s representations that the businesses were not only legitimate, but thriving,” the plaintiffs went forward with their investments but soon discovered “that the supposed businesses did not own any trucks, did not make any pickups from Best Buy’s warehouse, and did not deliver any products on Best Buy’s behalf,” it said. Alleging Best Buy aided and abetted fraud and engaged in “negligent misrepresentation,” the complaint seeks recovery of the $2.65 million, plus interest. Best Buy didn’t respond to our queries Wednesday.