Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 29 2012 @ 07:01 PM EDT |
Why, then, did the magistrate judge sanction only Apple?
Because only Apple at that point had presented a motion
seeking such relief
The first Apple should be Samsung.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: calris74 on Sunday, July 29 2012 @ 08:33 PM EDT |
. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 29 2012 @ 10:02 PM EDT |
. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: FrankH on Monday, July 30 2012 @ 03:34 AM EDT |
About halfway through the article in this sentence:
The ITC was
presented with the same date, by Apple, and the same arguements
that Apple used to obtain this order, Samsung points out, and decided that the
date the magistrate here chose was not the right starting point, as Samsung
points out in footnote 3 --- All right now, baby it's all
right now. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|