Companies Act - Winding up proceedings pending before High Courts, which are at nascent stage and have not progressed to advanced stage, can be transferred to NCLT : HC (See 'Legal Desk') PMLA - Considering involvement of applicant in selling fake Remdesivir injection at higher price, applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Arbitration Act - Any amicable settlement not incompatible with arbitration agreement is encouraged by Arbitral Tribunal : HC (See 'Legal Desk') M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 - Order passed by respondents is devoid of merit as land of petitioner is left open for purpose of any future road expansion : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Arbitration Act - Since appellant has failed to establish loss suffered, Arbitral Tribunal rightly rejected appellant's claim in this regard : HC (See 'Legal Desk') PMLA - Arrest order and consequent remand order are not illegal : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Keel-laying ceremony performed at Goa Shipyard (See 'Corp Brief') Companies Act - Winding up proceedings pending before High Courts, which are at nascent stage and have not progressed to advanced stage, can be transferred to NCLT : HC (See 'Legal Desk') SEBI Act - Extension of time can be allowed to SEBI to complete investigation : SAT (See 'Legal Desk') Arbitration Act - Respondent no.3 is not liable for repayment obligations of financial facilities extended by appellant to respondent no 1 company : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Mineral production grows by 8 percent in February (See 'Corp Brief') SARFAESI Act - Court refrains to adjudicate matter on merits when matter is already pending in DRAT : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Coal production in April up by 7.4% (See 'Corp Brief') SEBI Act - Appellants have made case for stay as rigours of directions of SEBI order would adversely affect business of Appellant as well as their clients : SAT (See 'Legal Desk') Trade Mark Act - Marks 'BETSONE' and 'BETASON' are deceptively similar to registered trademark 'BETNESOL' and visually, phonetically and structurally alike, with minimal alterations : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Voting by tribal communities blossoms as ECI's outreach to them bears fruit (See 'Corp Brief') SARFAESI Act - No fault can be found with respondent financial institution invoking Section 14 of SARFAESI Act by approaching District Magistrate, Rewa : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs observes Swachhata Pakhwada (See 'Corp Brief')

After US, Apple files suit against Qualcomm in China

Published: Jan 27, 2017

By TIOLCORP News Service

NEW DELHI, JAN 27, 2017: APPLE Inc. has filed two lawsuits against  Qualcomm  Inc. in China, extending a legal battle with its longtime chip supplier into the world's biggest market for smartphones. The suits, which Apple filed in Beijing's Intellectual Property Court, make claims similar to those in  a U.S. lawsuit the iPhone maker filed last week  targeting the way Qualcomm sells proprietary technology that is critical for smartphones. One of the China suits claims Qualcomm has violated China's antimonopoly law; the other relates to Qualcomm's licensing practices, which Apple says are unfair and unreasonable. Apple said it is seeking 1 billion yuan ($145 million) in damages in the antimonopoly suit.

Apple's U.S. lawsuit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in California, argues that Qualcomm leveraged its monopoly position as a manufacturer of baseband chips, a critical component in cellphones, to seek "onerous, unreasonable and costly" terms for patents. It also says that Qualcomm blocked Apple's ability to choose another chipset supplier. Apple, which says it has been overcharged billions of dollars by Qualcomm, is seeking to recover damages and block Qualcomm from demanding "excessive royalties."

Qualcomm called those Apple claims baseless, saying Apple mischaracterized agreements and negotiations and failed to acknowledge the value of the technology Qualcomm invented.

The Apple suits follow a lawsuit filed this month by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission  alleging Qualcomm engaged in unlawful tactics  to maintain a monopoly on baseband chips. That came after South Korea's antitrust regulator last month announced  a roughly $853 million fine  on Qualcomm for alleged anticompetitive patent-licensing practices. Qualcomm said it would fight both those actions.

TIOL CORP SEARCH

TIOL GROUP WEBSITES