A Chinese court is mediating between Apple Inc. and the Chinese company challenging its right to use the iPad trademark, seeking to get the companies to settle an awkward standoff over the issue.
The Guangdong High Court in southern China, is seeking to arrange a settlement, said Ma Dongxiao, a lawyer for Proview Electronics Co. The court on Feb. 29 began hearing Apple's appeal of lower court ruling that favored Proview in the trademark dispute.
"It is likely that we will settle out of court. The Guangdong High Court is helping to arrange it and the court also expects to do so," Ma said Monday.
China has sought to showcase its determination to protect trademarks and other intellectual property, but with hundreds of thousands employed in the assembly of Apple's iPhones and iPads is unlikely to want to disrupt the company's production and marketing in China.
Emboldened by signals that the U.S. Supreme Court may uphold parts of Arizona's immigration law, legislators and activists across the country say they are gearing up to push for similar get-tough measures in their states.
"We're getting our national network ready to run with the ball, and saturate state legislatures with versions of the law," said William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration. "We believe we can pass it in most states."
That goal may be a stretch, but lawmakers in about a dozen states told The Associated Press they were interested in proposing Arizona-style laws if its key components are upheld by the Supreme Court. A ruling is expected in June on the Department of Justice's appeal that the law conflicts with federal immigration policy.
Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said he was encouraged that several justices suggested during Wednesday's oral arguments that they are ready to let Arizona enforce the most controversial part of its law — a requirement that police officers check the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally.
A nationally known online bookseller must pay more than a half million dollars in taxes for books, music and movies bought by customers in New Mexico, the state Court of Appeals has ruled in a dispute over the state's power to tax corporate chains and Internet shopping.
The court's decision came Wednesday in a case involving an out-of-state online business, Barnes&nobles.com, LLC, which was part of the corporate family of bookseller Barnes & Noble Inc.
The online retailer was assessed gross receipts taxes in 2006 of $534,563 for sales from 1998 to 2005. The company protested and a state agency hearing officer agreed with the company that it wasn't required to collect and pay the tax because it had no presence in the state or what is known as a "substantial nexus" with New Mexico.
The online retailer was organized under Delaware laws and it had no employees or offices in the state. However, a separate Barnes and Noble company operates three bookstores in New Mexico, with the first of those started in Albuquerque in 1996 and the most recent in Las Cruces in 2003.
A federal appeals court on Monday threw out a jury's award of more than $650,000 to two Ohio tourists who were arrested in New Orleans on public drunkenness charges two days before Hurricane Katrina's landfall and jailed for more than a month after the storm.
A three-judge panel from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Orleans Parish Sheriff Marlin Gusman didn't falsely imprison Robie Waganfeald and Paul Kunkel Jr., both of Toledo.
The men's lawyers argued during an October 2010 trial that they were entitled by law to be released within 48 hours unless probable cause was found to keep them in custody. But the 5th Circuit judges concluded the 48-hour rule was suspended because of the 2005 storm.
"The undisputed evidence in this case compels the conclusion that Hurricane Katrina was a bona fide emergency within the meaning of the emergency exception to the 48-hour rule," Judge Jacques Wiener wrote. "Indeed, if Katrina was not an emergency, it is difficult to imagine any set of facts that would fit that description."
Gusman said the court ruling's "speaks eloquently."
"Our priority throughout the days and weeks surrounding Hurricane Katrina was the safe transfer of more than 6,000 inmates in an unprecedented movement that had never been attempted in the history of Orleans Parish or the state of Louisiana," Gusman said in a statement. "All of those inmates arrived at their destinations without a single fatality or serious injury."
The Justice Department's civil rights division on Monday objected to a new photo ID requirement for voters in Texas because many Hispanic voters lack state-issued identification.
Texas follows South Carolina as the second state in recent months to become embroiled in a court battle with the Justice Department over new photo ID requirements for voters.
Photo ID laws have become a point of contention in the 2012 elections. Liberal groups have said the requirements are the product of Republican-controlled state governments and are aimed at disenfranchising people who tend to vote Democratic — African-Americans, Hispanics, people of low-income and college students.
Proponents of such legislation say the measures are aimed at combating voter fraud. But advocacy groups for minorities and the poor dispute that and argue there is no evidence of significant voter fraud.
In regard to Texas, "I cannot conclude that the state has sustained its burden" of showing that the newly enacted law has neither a discriminatory purpose nor effect, Thomas E. Perez, the head of the Justice Department's civil rights division, said in a letter to the Texas secretary of state.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot has said the Obama administration is hostile to laws like the one passed last year in Texas.
