THIS IS THE SAME JUDGE AS OUR CASES
GOOD ,I THINK?.... SHE SEEMS TO WANT SETTLEMENTS!
WOW!.....a very decisive lady.... she will be A VERY FAIR JUDGE... I THINK THE INFRINGERS SHOULD SETTLE UP RATHER QUICKLY.
I'M NOW LOOKING FORWARD TO A POSSIBLE LAWSUIT VERDICT .
WHAT WILL BE THE VERDICT AND HOW MUCH WILL GO TO THE BUYERS OF VPLM'S PATENTS????
AND THE VPLM LAWYERS ....
VERY BIG NUMBERS HERE....
I SEE WHY THEY ARE ALL ON BOARD WITH VPLM'S PATENTS...
APPLE SHOULD HAVE SETTLED 5 YEARS AGO WHEN THERE WERE ONLY 5 AND FIRST OFFERED . NOW THERE ARE 25. NOT 20 PATENTS
I THINK WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE VERY SURPRISED WHEN THIS IS ALL OVER AND DONE WITH...A LOT OF KIDS WILL BE GETTING POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION WITH OUR HOLDINGS
U.S. judge approves $415 million settlement in tech worker lawsuit
Dan Levine
2 MIN READ
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Wednesday granted final approval to a $415 million settlement that ends a high profile lawsuit in which workers accused Apple, Google and two other Silicon Valley companies of conspiring to hold down salaries.
The plaintiffs alleged that Apple Inc, Google Inc, Intel Corp and Adobe Systems Inc agreed to avoid poaching each other’s employees, thus limiting job mobility and, as a result, keeping a lid on salaries.
In a ruling on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, found the deal was fair to the thousands of plaintiff workers in the class action.
Attorneys representing those workers had asked for about $81 million in fees. However, Koh decided such an award would be an inappropriate “windfall” for the lawyers, and awarded about $40 million instead.
The antitrust class action lawsuit was filed in 2011. It has been closely watched because of the possibility that big damages might be awarded and for the opportunity to peek into the world of some elite U.S. tech firms.
The case was based largely on emails in which Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, former Google Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt and some of their rivals detailed plans to avoid poaching each other’s prized engineers.
The case is In Re: High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California 11-cv-2509.
Reporting by Dan Levine; Editing by Robert Birsel
‘Patience comes with experience’
