<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Garmin Slumps After Patent Defeat]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/12/23/garmin-slumps-after-patent-defeat/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/12/23/garmin-slumps-after-patent-defeat/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/12/23/garmin-slumps-after-patent-defeat/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/analysis/" rel="tag">Technical Analysis</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/grmn/" rel="tag">Garmin Ltd (GRMN)</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="Garmin (GRMN)" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2010/08/garmin-1282751380.jpg" />Thursday morning, GPS specialist Garmin Ltd. (<a class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/garmin-ltd/grmn/nas">GRMN</a>) said it <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSGE6BM09820101223">lost a patent dispute</a> with Japanese firm Pioneer Corp. The District Court of Dusseldorf in Germany found that two patents owned by Pioneer were infringed by a certain functionality in Garmin's software.</p>
<p>However, Garmin says it has already worked out "minor software revisions that eliminate the narrow functionality at issue in the litigation." As a result, the company doesn't expect any significant impact on its ability to import and sell its navigational products.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/12/23/garmin-slumps-after-patent-defeat/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Garmin Slumps After Patent Defeat</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/12/23/garmin-slumps-after-patent-defeat/">Garmin Slumps After Patent Defeat</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 23 Dec 2010 12:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/12/23/garmin-slumps-after-patent-defeat/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19775191/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/12/23/garmin-slumps-after-patent-defeat/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>District Court of Dusseldorf</category><category>featured</category><category>Garmin</category><category>Garmin lawsuit</category><category>Garmin patent</category><category>GRMN</category><category>inthenews</category><category>investor sentiment</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>options</category><category>patent</category><category>Pioneer</category><category>puts</category><category>short interest</category><category>short sellers</category><category>technical analysis</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Elizabeth Harrow]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2010 12:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Shares of RIMM Rise as NTP Slaps Competitors with Lawsuits]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/09/shares-of-rimm-rise-as-ntp-slaps-competitors-with-lawsuits/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/09/shares-of-rimm-rise-as-ntp-slaps-competitors-with-lawsuits/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/09/shares-of-rimm-rise-as-ntp-slaps-competitors-with-lawsuits/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/msft/" rel="tag">Microsoft (MSFT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/aapl/" rel="tag">Apple Inc (AAPL)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/mot/" rel="tag">Motorola (MOT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/t/" rel="tag">AT and T (T)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/s/" rel="tag">Sprint Nextel Corp (S)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rimm/" rel="tag">Research in Motion (RIMM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/vz/" rel="tag">Verizon Communications (VZ)</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/10/verizon-wireless-voyager.jpg" />NTP, a Richmond, VA.-based company, has filed lawsuits against Apple (<a class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/apple-inc/aapl/nas">AAPL</a>), Motorola (<a class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/motorola-inc/mot/nys">MOT</a>), Microsoft (<a class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/microsoft-corporation/msft/nas">MSFT</a>), Google (<a class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/google-inc/goog/nas">GOOG</a>) and others, claiming that they all violate the patents this company holds. NTP, in recent years, has made a business out of suing wireless companies.<br />
<br />
The beneficiary? Research In Motion (<a class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/research-in-motion-limited/rimm/nas">RIMM</a>) , whose stock rose 7% on the news.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/09/shares-of-rimm-rise-as-ntp-slaps-competitors-with-lawsuits/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Shares of RIMM Rise as NTP Slaps Competitors with Lawsuits</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/09/shares-of-rimm-rise-as-ntp-slaps-competitors-with-lawsuits/">Shares of RIMM Rise as NTP Slaps Competitors with Lawsuits</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/09/shares-of-rimm-rise-as-ntp-slaps-competitors-with-lawsuits/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19548487/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/09/shares-of-rimm-rise-as-ntp-slaps-competitors-with-lawsuits/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>aapl</category><category>goog</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>mot</category><category>NTP</category><category>NTP sues appl</category><category>rimm</category><category>s</category><category>stocks</category><category>t</category><category>vz</category><category>wireless</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Nikhil Hutheesing]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[General Mills Sued over Fruit Roll Ups]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/01/general-mills-sued-over-fruit-roll-ups/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/01/general-mills-sued-over-fruit-roll-ups/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/01/general-mills-sued-over-fruit-roll-ups/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gis/" rel="tag">General Mills (GIS)</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2010/01/generalmills-logo-240.jpg" alt="General Mills GIS logo" />On Wednesday General Mills (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/general-mills-inc/gis/nys">GIS</a>) released its quarterly earnings report, revealing that the food firm's earnings dropped <a target="_blank" href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/06/30/general-mills-down-after-q4-report/">during the fourth quarter</a>. This was not the only news from GIS over the past few days. The company finds itself the subject of a <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2010/06/29/2010-06-29_general_mills_slammed_with_law_suit.html">lawsuit</a> that once again has parental responsibility looking for the nearest exit. <br />
<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/01/general-mills-sued-over-fruit-roll-ups/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>General Mills Sued over Fruit Roll Ups</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/01/general-mills-sued-over-fruit-roll-ups/">General Mills Sued over Fruit Roll Ups</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 01 Jul 2010 15:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/01/general-mills-sued-over-fruit-roll-ups/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19538365/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/07/01/general-mills-sued-over-fruit-roll-ups/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>frivolous lawsuit</category><category>fruit snacks</category><category>General Mills</category><category>GIS</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>parental control</category><category>parental responsibility</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 15:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Court Sides with eBay in Tiffany Counterfeit Case]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/04/court-sides-with-ebay-in-tiffany-counterfeit-case/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/04/court-sides-with-ebay-in-tiffany-counterfeit-case/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/04/court-sides-with-ebay-in-tiffany-counterfeit-case/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/management/" rel="tag">Management</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/ebay/" rel="tag">eBay (EBAY)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/tif/" rel="tag">Tiffany and Co (TIF)</a></p><p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2010/01/ebay-logo-240.jpg" />In the 2004 <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-20001585-36.html?tag=mncol;posts">counterfeit goods lawsuit</a> brought against online auction giant eBay (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/ebay-inc/ebay/nas">EBAY</a>) by Tiffany &amp; Co. (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/tiffany-and-company/tif/nys">TIF</a>), a New York appeals court has ruled in favor of eBay. The suit stemmed from an independent investigation conducted by Tiffany, where an investigatory sampling determined that more than 70% of supposed Tiffany items on eBay were found to be fakes. Tiffany maintains that eBay bears responsibility for cleaning out those counterfeit items.</p>
<p>Yes, eBay bears some responsibility in this matter, but that responsibility begins and ends at the removal of offending listings when they are reported or discovered. Any random examination of listings by eBay for potential rule violations or illegal activities falls under the heading of good faith, not due diligence.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/04/court-sides-with-ebay-in-tiffany-counterfeit-case/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Court Sides with eBay in Tiffany Counterfeit Case</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/04/court-sides-with-ebay-in-tiffany-counterfeit-case/">Court Sides with eBay in Tiffany Counterfeit Case</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sun, 04 Apr 2010 10:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/04/court-sides-with-ebay-in-tiffany-counterfeit-case/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19425448/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/04/court-sides-with-ebay-in-tiffany-counterfeit-case/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>appeal</category><category>counterfeit</category><category>decision</category><category>EBAY</category><category>featured</category><category>handbag</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>TIF</category><category>Tiffany</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary Sattler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2010 10:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[YouTube Attorney Alleges Viacom Set Up]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/20/youtube-attorney-alleges-viacom-set-up/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/20/youtube-attorney-alleges-viacom-set-up/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/20/youtube-attorney-alleges-viacom-set-up/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/internet/" rel="tag">Internet</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/via/" rel="tag">Viacom (VIA)</a></p><p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/12/viacom-logo.jpg" />Viacom is now being blamed for secretly uploading copyright infringing content by YouTube's chief counsel, Zahavah Levine. This announcement comes as the court prepares to render a decision in the $1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit Viacom (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/viacom-inc-new/via/nys">VIA</a>) brought against Google's (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/google-inc/goog/nas">GOOG</a>) Internet video giant, YouTube.</p>
<p><a href="http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2010/03/broadcast-yourself.html">Attorney Levine has stated in a blog post</a>: "For years, Viacom continuously and secretly uploaded its content to YouTube, even while publicly complaining about its presence there."</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/20/youtube-attorney-alleges-viacom-set-up/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>YouTube Attorney Alleges Viacom Set Up</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/20/youtube-attorney-alleges-viacom-set-up/">YouTube Attorney Alleges Viacom Set Up</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/20/youtube-attorney-alleges-viacom-set-up/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19407133/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/20/youtube-attorney-alleges-viacom-set-up/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>copyright</category><category>DMCA</category><category>Google</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>VIA</category><category>Viacom</category><category>video</category><category>YouTube</category><category>Zahavah Levine</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary Sattler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Synovus Financial Slides on SEC Inquiry]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/03/synovus-financial-slides-on-sec-inquiry/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/03/synovus-financial-slides-on-sec-inquiry/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/03/synovus-financial-slides-on-sec-inquiry/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/sec-filings/" rel="tag">SEC Filings</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bad-news/" rel="tag">Bad News</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2010/03/synovus-logo.jpg" />Late Tuesday, Synovus Financial (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/synovus-financial-corporatio/snv/nys">SNV</a>) confessed that it's <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2010/03/01/daily40.html?ana=from_rss&amp;utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bizj_atlanta+%28Atlanta+Business+Chronicle%29">facing an informal inquiry</a> by the Securities &amp; Exchange Commission (SEC). In a regulatory filing, Synovus disclosed that the SEC is attempting "to determine whether any person or entity has violated the federal securities laws." The financial firm was first informed of the informal investigation in a letter from the SEC dated Dec. 15, 2009.</p>
<p>Synovus said it intends to cooperate fully with the SEC's inquiry, but declined to provide further information on the matter. "We cannot discuss any details of the informal inquiry," explained spokesman Gregory Hudgison. "As stated in our public filings, the SEC has not asserted that Synovus or any person or entity has committed any securities violations."</p>
<br />
<p> </p>
<p> </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/03/synovus-financial-slides-on-sec-inquiry/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Synovus Financial Slides on SEC Inquiry</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/03/synovus-financial-slides-on-sec-inquiry/">Synovus Financial Slides on SEC Inquiry</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/03/synovus-financial-slides-on-sec-inquiry/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19381309/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/03/03/synovus-financial-slides-on-sec-inquiry/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>Sea Island</category><category>SeaIsland</category><category>SEC</category><category>SEC inquiry</category><category>SecInquiry</category><category>Securities Exchange Commission</category><category>SecuritiesExchangeCommission</category><category>short sellers</category><category>ShortSellers</category><category>SNV</category><category>Synovus Financial</category><category>SynovusFinancial</category><category>technical analysis</category><category>TechnicalAnalysis</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Elizabeth Harrow]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[A Rather Litigious Monday Morning for Motorola]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/25/a-rather-litigious-monday-morning-for-motorola/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/25/a-rather-litigious-monday-morning-for-motorola/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/25/a-rather-litigious-monday-morning-for-motorola/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/mot/" rel="tag">Motorola (MOT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rimm/" rel="tag">Research in Motion (RIMM)</a></p><p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2010/01/motorola-logo-240.jpg" />Monday morning, mobile phone firm Motorola (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/motorola-inc/mot/nys" target="_blank">MOT</a>) found itself on the lips of lawyers and judges. The first reason is that a <a href="http://www.theflyonthewall.com/permalinks/entry.php/MOTid1188314" target="_blank">lawsuit commenced</a> in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of MOT stock purchasers who made their purchase from December 6, 2007 through January 22, 2008.</p>
<p>The lawsuit alleges that Motorola and "certain of its officers and directors" violated federal securities laws by "intentionally and knowingly misstating the 2007 fourth quarter earnings projections and sales demands for the RAZR2 during the 2007 holiday shopping season." The suit states that Motorola's RAZR2 did not attract buyers thanks to its $299 price tag and the fact that it had not improved enough from the RAZR. Nevertheless, Motorola made positive statements all while losing "significant market share" to its competition. The defendants claim that Motorola senior execs knew that Motorola was not on track to hit their profit forecast of 12 cents to 14 cents per share, and would like a bit of compensation.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/25/a-rather-litigious-monday-morning-for-motorola/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>A Rather Litigious Monday Morning for Motorola</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/25/a-rather-litigious-monday-morning-for-motorola/">A Rather Litigious Monday Morning for Motorola</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/25/a-rather-litigious-monday-morning-for-motorola/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19330069/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/25/a-rather-litigious-monday-morning-for-motorola/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Blackberry</category><category>featured</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>lawsuits</category><category>MOT</category><category>Motorola</category><category>RAZR</category><category>RAZR2</category><category>Research in Motion Limited</category><category>RIMM</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Kodak Alleges Patent Infringement by Apple, Research in Motion]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/14/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-research-in-motion/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/14/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-research-in-motion/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/14/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-research-in-motion/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/aapl/" rel="tag">Apple Inc (AAPL)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rimm/" rel="tag">Research in Motion (RIMM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/ek/" rel="tag">Eastman Kodak (EK)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/options/" rel="tag">Options</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2010/01/kodak-logo-240.jpg" />Eastman Kodak (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/eastman-kodak-company/ek/nys">EK</a>) is grabbing headlines after the film firm <a href="http://money.aol.com/rtn/pr/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-and-rim/rfid289189366?channel=pf">filed a complaint</a> with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), alleging that Apple's (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/apple-inc/aapl/nas">AAPL</a>) iPhone and Research In Motion Limited's (<a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/research-in-motion-limited/rimm/nas">RIMM</a>) BlackBerry camera phones infringe on Kodak's patents. Kodak is asking the ITC to block Apple and RIMM from importing the offending devices.</p>
<p>Additionally, the iconic photography company filed two suits against Apple in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. Kodak is claiming infringement of patents "related to digital cameras and certain computer processes."</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/14/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-research-in-motion/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Kodak Alleges Patent Infringement by Apple, Research in Motion</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/14/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-research-in-motion/">Kodak Alleges Patent Infringement by Apple, Research in Motion</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/14/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-research-in-motion/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19316759/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/14/kodak-alleges-patent-infringement-by-apple-research-in-motion/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>AAPL</category><category>Apple</category><category>BlackBerry</category><category>Eastman Kodak</category><category>EK</category><category>featured</category><category>inthenews</category><category>iPhone</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>patent infringement</category><category>Research In Motion Limited</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Elizabeth Harrow]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Nokia sues LCD makers for price fixing]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/01/nokia-sues-lcd-makers-for-price-fixing/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/01/nokia-sues-lcd-makers-for-price-fixing/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/01/nokia-sues-lcd-makers-for-price-fixing/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nok/" rel="tag">Nokia Corp. (NOK)</a></p><img hspace="4" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/02/nok-nokia-logo.jpg" />This morning, Nokia (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/nokia-corporation/nok/nys">NOK</a>) -- primarily known for its presence in the mobile phone arena -- announced that it is <a href="http://money.aol.com/rtn/ap/nokia-sues-lcd-crt-display-makers/rfid276033013?channel=pf">filing suits</a> against some liquid crystal display (LCD) makers. NOK believes that these LCD producers are engaging in a bit of price fixing. It filed suits in the U.S. and Britain last month. <br /><br />NOK believes that a group of manufacturers was fixing the prices of LCDs that the company uses in its handsets and of cathode ray tubes. The company said that it "has filed suits to recover overcharges it paid as a result of cartel activities which are currently under governmental investigation." <p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/01/nokia-sues-lcd-makers-for-price-fixing/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Nokia sues LCD makers for price fixing</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/01/nokia-sues-lcd-makers-for-price-fixing/">Nokia sues LCD makers for price fixing</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/01/nokia-sues-lcd-makers-for-price-fixing/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19259652/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/12/01/nokia-sues-lcd-makers-for-price-fixing/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>cartel</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>LCD</category><category>nok</category><category>Nokia</category><category>price fixing</category><category>PriceFixing</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Burger King franchisees sue over $1 burgers]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/13/burger-king-franchisees-sue-over-1-burgers/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/13/burger-king-franchisees-sue-over-1-burgers/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/13/burger-king-franchisees-sue-over-1-burgers/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/competitive-strategy/" rel="tag">Competitive Strategy</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bkc/" rel="tag">Burger King Hldgs (BKC)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/entrepreneurs/" rel="tag">Entrepreneurs</a></p><p><img  border="1" hspace="4" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/11/bkc-logo-200.jpg" alt="" />Interesting little battle shaping up in the fast-food realm, and it isn't between restaurants -- it is within one. According to the Associated Press, Burger King (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/burger-king-holdings-inc/bkc/nys">BKC</a>) franchisees are <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BURGER_KING_LAWSUIT_FLOL-?SITE=FLPET&amp;SECTION=HOME">suing the company</a> over its recent $1 double cheeseburger promotion.</p>
<p>The reason for the lawsuit is that the franchisees are losing money on the deal because the company is setting maximum menu prices, which Burger King is not allowed to do. The National Franchise Association (NFA), which represents more than 80% of Burger King's U.S. franchise owners, says that the promotion is forcing restaurant owners to sell the quarter-pound burger at a 10-cent loss. One Burger King franchisee said that the burger in question typically costs franchisees $1.10.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/13/burger-king-franchisees-sue-over-1-burgers/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Burger King franchisees sue over $1 burgers</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/13/burger-king-franchisees-sue-over-1-burgers/">Burger King franchisees sue over $1 burgers</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/13/burger-king-franchisees-sue-over-1-burgers/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19236202/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/13/burger-king-franchisees-sue-over-1-burgers/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Burger King</category><category>cheeseburger</category><category>double cheeseburger</category><category>franchise</category><category>franchisees</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Madoff family to be sued for $198 million]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/madoff-family-to-be-sued-for-198-million/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/madoff-family-to-be-sued-for-198-million/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/madoff-family-to-be-sued-for-198-million/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/scandals/" rel="tag">Scandals</a></p><div style="DISPLAY: block" id="imageResults"><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/01/madoffpicture.jpg" /></div>
<p>Even with the ringleader in jail, the pursuit of <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/BernieMadoff/">Bernie Madoff</a> doesn't seem to be finished. Sunday night, the trustee who's winding down the Madoff company <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/24/60minutes/main5339719.shtml" target="_blank">said on <em>60 Minutes</em></a> that Madoff's two sons (Mark and Andrew), brother (Peter) and niece (Shana) will be slapped with a $198 million suit. They are alleged to have known about the <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/Ponzischeme/">Ponzi scheme</a>, according to the trustee, Irving Picard and his chief counsel, David Sheehan.</p>
<p>Sheehan and Picard are also working under the assumption that there is still some money hidden, quite a lot of it, in fact. Picard told the show, "We'd assume it's millions and millions of dollars." Yet, this probably wouldn't help with the task in front of them. </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/madoff-family-to-be-sued-for-198-million/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Madoff family to be sued for $198 million</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/madoff-family-to-be-sued-for-198-million/">Madoff family to be sued for $198 million</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 28 Sep 2009 10:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/24/60minutes/main5339719.shtml>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/madoff-family-to-be-sued-for-198-million/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19176017/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/madoff-family-to-be-sued-for-198-million/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>bernard madoff</category><category>bernie madoff</category><category>featured</category><category>fraud</category><category>fraud investigation</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>litigation</category><category>madoff</category><category>madoff scandal</category><category>madoff securities</category><category>ponzi</category><category>ponzi scheme</category><category>ruth madoff</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 10:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Microsoft fined $290 million in a patent ruling]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/microsoft-fined-290-million-in-a-patent-ruling/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/microsoft-fined-290-million-in-a-patent-ruling/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/microsoft-fined-290-million-in-a-patent-ruling/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/msft/" rel="tag">Microsoft (MSFT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/canada/" rel="tag">Canada</a></p><p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/04/microsoft_logo.jpg" alt="" />A judge in Texas has ordered <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/microsoft-corporation/msft/nas">Microsoft</a> (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/microsoft-corporation/msft/nas">MSFT</a>) to stop selling some versions of its Word software in the <a href="http://money.aol.com/article/microsoft-to-pay-290m-in-patent-ruling/492817">United States within two months</a>. This follows a May decision that found Word infringes on a Canadian tech firm's patent. </p>
<p>The offending programs are Word 2003 and Word 2007, which seem to have borrowed technology on how to encode and display information. In addition, MSFT was ordered to pay $290 million to the Canadian firm i4i for damages and interest. The judge also issued an injunction that will take effect in 60 days, this move will not allow MSFT to sell Word products including the patented technology.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/microsoft-fined-290-million-in-a-patent-ruling/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Microsoft fined $290 million in a patent ruling</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/microsoft-fined-290-million-in-a-patent-ruling/">Microsoft fined $290 million in a patent ruling</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/microsoft-fined-290-million-in-a-patent-ruling/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19127973/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/microsoft-fined-290-million-in-a-patent-ruling/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>i4i</category><category>injunction</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>Microsoft</category><category>patent</category><category>patent infringement</category><category>PatentInfringement</category><category>patents</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Abbott Labs to pay J&amp;J $1.67 billion from patent lawsuit]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/30/abbott-labs-to-pay-jandj-1-67-billion-from-patent-lawsuit/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/30/abbott-labs-to-pay-jandj-1-67-billion-from-patent-lawsuit/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/30/abbott-labs-to-pay-jandj-1-67-billion-from-patent-lawsuit/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/jnj/" rel="tag">Johnson and Johnson (JNJ)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/abt/" rel="tag">Abbott Laboratories (ABT)</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/01/jnj-johnson--johnson-logo.jpg" alt="" /> Yesterday, pharmaceutical giant Johnson &amp; Johnson (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/johnson-and-johns-dc/jnj/nys">JNJ</a>) said that its patent infringement lawsuit against Abbott Labs (<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/abbott-laboratories/abt/nys">ABT</a>) <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/31639326">was successful</a>, with Abbott ordered to pay $1.67 billion because its best-selling drug, Humira, too closely resembles J&amp;J's Remicade. The drugs are intended to treat rheumatoid arthritis by blocking a substance known as TNF, which causes inflammation. According to the Arthritis Foundation, 1.3 million Americans suffer from rheumatoid arthritis, a chronic disease. Abbott Labs sponsors the group's programs specifically related to rheumatoid arthritis.
<p> </p>
<p>The verdict leaves Abbott stock in a tenuous position. The healthcare sector has been in the crosshairs lately as concerns about costly medical reform swirl, with the SPDR S&amp;P Pharmaceuticals (XPH) ETF down slightly year-to-date, compared to the nearly 5% gain on the S&amp;P 500. Abbott Labs has underperformed both comparables, and is down 10% year-to-date.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/30/abbott-labs-to-pay-jandj-1-67-billion-from-patent-lawsuit/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Abbott Labs to pay J&amp;J $1.67 billion from patent lawsuit</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/30/abbott-labs-to-pay-jandj-1-67-billion-from-patent-lawsuit/">Abbott Labs to pay J&amp;J $1.67 billion from patent lawsuit</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/30/abbott-labs-to-pay-jandj-1-67-billion-from-patent-lawsuit/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19082473/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/30/abbott-labs-to-pay-jandj-1-67-billion-from-patent-lawsuit/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>abt</category><category>inthenews</category><category>jnj</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>pharmaceuticals</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[James Cullen]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks:  A look at Eddie Van Halen's frivolous lawsuit against Nike]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/19/jockstocks-a-look-at-eddie-van-halens-frivolous-lawsuit-again/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/19/jockstocks-a-look-at-eddie-van-halens-frivolous-lawsuit-again/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/19/jockstocks-a-look-at-eddie-van-halens-frivolous-lawsuit-again/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nke/" rel="tag">NIKE, Inc'B' (NKE)</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/03/nike_160.jpg" />It is a rare occasion when several of my interests line up ... but that has happened this week. First and foremost, I am a sneakerhead - a sneakerfreak - a sneakerologist - whatever you want to call it. I am also a fan of music, namely great guitar players - and being a child of the 80's, Eddie Van Halen is one of the first names that comes to mind when asked to name great guitarists. Well, sneakers and Eddie Van have collided, as the rocker is suing <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/nike-inc/nke/nys">Nike</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/nike-inc/nke/nys">NKE</a>) for using his "Frankenstrat" guitar's color scheme in a <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2009/06/17/eddie-van-halen-sues-nike-over-guitars-signature-color-scheme/">pair of shoes without his permission</a>.<br /><br />Nike has created a design for a pair of its Dunk Low sneakers that has a red sole on a black show, with white and black diagonal stripes decorating the sole. Eddie contends that this design has caused "irreparable harm and damage" to his design, which he trademarked back in 2001. According to Nike, "Nike's Dunk shoe design is not substantially similar to any of the Van Halen designs, and Nike has not referenced the 'Van Halen' name or image as part of any marketing campaign or promotional material associated with the shoe."<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/19/jockstocks-a-look-at-eddie-van-halens-frivolous-lawsuit-again/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks:  A look at Eddie Van Halen's frivolous lawsuit against Nike</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/19/jockstocks-a-look-at-eddie-van-halens-frivolous-lawsuit-again/">JockStocks:  A look at Eddie Van Halen's frivolous lawsuit against Nike</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/19/jockstocks-a-look-at-eddie-van-halens-frivolous-lawsuit-again/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19071855/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/19/jockstocks-a-look-at-eddie-van-halens-frivolous-lawsuit-again/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Eddie Van Halen</category><category>EddieVanHalen</category><category>frivolous lawsuit</category><category>FrivolousLawsuit</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>litigiousness</category><category>Nike</category><category>shoes</category><category>sneakers</category><category>Van Halen</category><category>VanHalen</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[MBIA sued by other banks for splitting units]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/14/mbia-sued-by-other-banks-for-splitting-units/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/14/mbia-sued-by-other-banks-for-splitting-units/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/14/mbia-sued-by-other-banks-for-splitting-units/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/after-the-bell/" rel="tag">After the Bell</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/jpm/" rel="tag">JPMorgan Chase (JPM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bac/" rel="tag">Bank of America (BAC)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/ms/" rel="tag">Morgan Stanley (MS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/mbi/" rel="tag">MBIA Inc (MBI)</a></p><p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/01/mbi-mbia-logo.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />In yesterday's online edition of <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124224623136616493.html?mod=wsjcrmain"><em>The Wall Street Journal</em></a>, it was reported that <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/mbia-inc/mbi/nys">MBIA</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/mbia-inc/mbi/nys">MBI</a>) is facing lawsuits from a group of 18 different financial institutions. The lawsuit was filed in New York State court and includes the likes of <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/jpm/nys">J.P. Morgan Chase</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/jpm/nys">JPM</a>), <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/bac/nys">Bank of America</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/bac/nys">BAC</a>), <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ms/nys">Morgan Stanley</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ms/nys">MS</a>), and <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ubs-ag-switzerland/ubs/nys">UBS</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ubs-ag-switzerland/ubs/nys">UBS</a>). <br /><br />These banks are claiming that the way MBIA split its municipal bond insurance business earlier this year was "an unlawful attempt to escape" its contractual obligations to cover losses from mortgage securities. In addition to the split earlier this year, MBIA shifted $5 billion to a municipal bond insurance company. </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/14/mbia-sued-by-other-banks-for-splitting-units/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>MBIA sued by other banks for splitting units</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/14/mbia-sued-by-other-banks-for-splitting-units/">MBIA sued by other banks for splitting units</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 14 May 2009 08:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/14/mbia-sued-by-other-banks-for-splitting-units/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1545575/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/14/mbia-sued-by-other-banks-for-splitting-units/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>bac</category><category>banks</category><category>inthenews</category><category>jpm</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>legal drama</category><category>legal troubles</category><category>LegalDrama</category><category>LegalTroubles</category><category>MBIA</category><category>ms</category><category>municipal bond insurance business</category><category>MunicipalBondInsuranceBusiness</category><category>ubs</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 08:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Is the Qualcomm-Broadcom dispute finally settled?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/27/is-the-qualcomm-broadcom-dispute-finally-be-settled/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/27/is-the-qualcomm-broadcom-dispute-finally-be-settled/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/27/is-the-qualcomm-broadcom-dispute-finally-be-settled/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/major-movement/" rel="tag">Major Movement</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/earnings-reports/" rel="tag">Earnings Reports</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/deals/" rel="tag">Deals</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/good-news/" rel="tag">Good news</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/qcom/" rel="tag">QUALCOMM Inc (QCOM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/brcm/" rel="tag">Broadcom Corp'A' (BRCM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/options/" rel="tag">Options</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/analysis/" rel="tag">Technical Analysis</a></p><a href="http://www.qualcomm.com/investor/index.html" target="_blank"><img hspace="4" border="0" align="right" vspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/02/qcom-qualcomm-logo.jpg" alt="QCOM logo" /></a><a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/qualcomm-incorporated/qcom/nas">Qualcomm</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/qualcomm-incorporated/qcom/nas">QCOM</a> - <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/qualcomm-incorporated/qcom/nas/option-chains">option chain</a>) shares are rising today despite a <a href="http://money.aol.com/news/articles/qp/pr/_a/qualcomm-announces-second-quarter-fiscal/rfid207989061">weak earnings report</a> this morning after the company agreed to pay <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/legal/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=217200145&amp;cid=RSSfeed_TechWeb" target="_blank">$891 million</a> to <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/broadcom-corporation/brcm/nas">Broadcom</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/broadcom-corporation/brcm/nas">BRCM</a>) to dismiss all pending lawsuits between the two companies. The $891 settlement was not as high as the figure some analysts had feared QCOM would have had to pay BRCM. Plus, this dispute has been raging for quite some time with no end in sight, so a cessation of hostilities should be good for both companies. If you think that the stock won't fall by too much in the coming months, then now could be a good time to look at a bullish hedged trade on QCOM.<br /><br />QCOM opened this morning at $42.35. So far today the stock has hit a low of $42.30 and a high of $44.59. As of 11:40, QCOM is trading at $43.78, up $2.42 (5.8%). The chart for QCOM looks bearish and <a href="http://www.iotogo.com/spoutlookonline" target="_blank">S&amp;P</a> gives QCOM a negative 2 STARS (out of 5) sell ranking.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/27/is-the-qualcomm-broadcom-dispute-finally-be-settled/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Is the Qualcomm-Broadcom dispute finally settled?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/27/is-the-qualcomm-broadcom-dispute-finally-be-settled/">Is the Qualcomm-Broadcom dispute finally settled?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/27/is-the-qualcomm-broadcom-dispute-finally-be-settled/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1529351/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/27/is-the-qualcomm-broadcom-dispute-finally-be-settled/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>BRCM</category><category>Broadcom</category><category>earnings</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Investors Observer</category><category>InvestorsObserver</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>options</category><category>QCOM</category><category>Qualcomm</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Brent Archer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: Pony sues Nike, is the pot calling the kettle black?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/jockstocks-pony-sues-nike-is-the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/jockstocks-pony-sues-nike-is-the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/jockstocks-pony-sues-nike-is-the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/scandals/" rel="tag">Scandals</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nke/" rel="tag">NIKE, Inc'B' (NKE)</a></p><p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/04/pony1.gif" />Footwear manufacturer <a href="http://sportsonesource.com/news/fbu/fbu_article.asp?section=8&amp;Prod=5&amp;id=27351">Pony is suing </a>much larger (and presumably richer) foe Nike (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/nike-inc/nke/nys">NKE</a>). Pony contends that Nike has infringed on its <a href="http://www.sneakerfiles.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/spud-webb-pony-dunk-contest.jpg">"iconic logo"</a> (<a href="http://alltalksports.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/nike-air-jordans-i.jpg">look familiar?</a>) in Nike's new <a href="http://limitedhype.com/2009/03/nike-v-for-victory/">"V for Victory" soccer advertising campaign</a>. </p>
<p>Pony contends that the chevron seen on the player's chests is far too close to its chevron-based logo, which the company has used for 35 years. </p>
<p>Pony stated, "The key distinguishing feature of the [Nike] campaign is the use of a chevron mark, which is identical or virtually identical to the registered trademarks owned by Pony." <br /><br />Does Pony have a point? Yes, but I have some problems I feel I should address here. First, I am no legal or design expert, but isn't Pony's original chevron logo a bit similar to Nike's iconic swoosh? </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/jockstocks-pony-sues-nike-is-the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: Pony sues Nike, is the pot calling the kettle black?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/jockstocks-pony-sues-nike-is-the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black/">JockStocks: Pony sues Nike, is the pot calling the kettle black?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/jockstocks-pony-sues-nike-is-the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1513787/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/10/jockstocks-pony-sues-nike-is-the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Air Jordan</category><category>AirJordan</category><category>copyrightinfringement</category><category>food</category><category>infringement</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>logos</category><category>Nike</category><category>Pony</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Nvidia issues a countersuit against Intel]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/27/nvidia-issues-a-countersuit-against-intel/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/27/nvidia-issues-a-countersuit-against-intel/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/27/nvidia-issues-a-countersuit-against-intel/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/intc/" rel="tag">Intel (INTC)</a></p><div style="display: block;" id="imageResults"><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/08/nvda.jpg" /></div>
Late yesterday, chip maker <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/nvidia-corporation/nvda/nas">Nvidia</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/nvidia-corporation/nvda/nas">NVDA</a>) <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/nvidia-files-countersuit-against-intel/story.aspx?guid={36E9B27D-C3AD-44C0-ADDC-BEAF33146DDD}">announced a countersuit</a> against <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/intel-corporation/intc/nas">Intel</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/intel-corporation/intc/nas">INTC</a>), as the two quarrel over what should be covered by a license agreement reached in 2004. NVDA's suit is in a Delaware Chancery Court, and it alleges that INTL breached a license agreement wherein the two companies had access to each other's technologies. <br /><br />The dispute began a month ago, as INTC filed a motion against NVDA (in the same court), noting that the agreement didn't allow NVDA to make chipsets with certain INTC chips. NVDA has dismissed this notion, claiming that INTC is blocking them from "making use of the very license rights that they agreed to provide."<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/27/nvidia-issues-a-countersuit-against-intel/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Nvidia issues a countersuit against Intel</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/27/nvidia-issues-a-countersuit-against-intel/">Nvidia issues a countersuit against Intel</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/27/nvidia-issues-a-countersuit-against-intel/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1500075/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/27/nvidia-issues-a-countersuit-against-intel/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>chips</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>lawsuits</category><category>legal disputes</category><category>LegalDisputes</category><category>nvda</category><category>nvidia</category><category>technology</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Altria (MO) falls on new legal precedent]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/13/altria-mo-falls-on-new-legal-precedent/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/13/altria-mo-falls-on-new-legal-precedent/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/13/altria-mo-falls-on-new-legal-precedent/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/major-movement/" rel="tag">Major Movement</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bad-news/" rel="tag">Bad News</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/mo/" rel="tag">Altria Group (MO)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/options/" rel="tag">Options</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/analysis/" rel="tag">Technical Analysis</a></p><a target="_blank" href="http://www.altria.com/investors/2_0_investorsover.asp"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="0" align="right" alt="MO logo" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/08/mo.jpg" /></a><a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/altria-group-inc/mo/nys">Altria</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/altria-group-inc/mo/nys">MO</a> - <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/altria-group-inc/mo/nys/option-chains">option chain</a>) stock is falling today after <a href="http://money.aol.com/news/articles/qp/ap/_a/fla-jury-to-decide-fault-in-smoking/rfid185097401">a Florida jury found that the death of a smoker was caused by his addiction to cigarettes</a>. MO's subsidiary Philip Morris now is involved in the second phase of the trial , which is to decide who is at fault for his addiction. This is the first case in which an individual smoker's family sued a tobacco company for death by cigarette addiction. This is a tough precedent for MO and the cigarette industry, as it opens the industry up to potentially limitless civil suits from individual smokers. <br /><br />While I believe that cigarette stocks are well-suited to our current environment, <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/philip-morris-international-inc/pm/nys">Phillip Morris International</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/philip-morris-international-inc/pm/nys">PM</a>), a former subsidiary of MO, looks much more attractive to me, due in part to its lower exposure to the American legal system. PM is off by only 0.6% today compared to MO' s 3.5%. If you think Altria stock won't be rising too far in the coming months, then it could be a good time to look at a bearish hedged play on MO.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/13/altria-mo-falls-on-new-legal-precedent/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Altria (MO) falls on new legal precedent</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/13/altria-mo-falls-on-new-legal-precedent/">Altria (MO) falls on new legal precedent</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 13 Feb 2009 13:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/13/altria-mo-falls-on-new-legal-precedent/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1459679/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/13/altria-mo-falls-on-new-legal-precedent/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Altria</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Investors Observer</category><category>InvestorsObserver</category><category>law</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>MO</category><category>options</category><category>Phillip Morris</category><category>Phillip Morris International</category><category>PhillipMorris</category><category>PhillipMorrisInternational</category><category>PM</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Brent Archer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 13:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Citigroup suing a pawnshop ... seriously]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/citigroup-suing-a-pawnshop-seriously/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/citigroup-suing-a-pawnshop-seriously/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/citigroup-suing-a-pawnshop-seriously/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/c/" rel="tag">Citigroup Inc. (C)</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/12/another_citigroup_logo.jpg" />Seriously, doesn't <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/citigroup-incorporated/c/nys">Citigroup</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/citigroup-incorporated/c/nys">C</a>) have bigger fish to fry? Yesterday, the company released plans for using $36.5 billion of the $45 billion it received from the government - a majority of which will go to residential mortgage lending. This is a good thing, especially in light of questions surfacing about the company's $400 million sponsorship of the New York Mets' new digs (will they or won't they sponsor the stadium ... sure looks like they will).<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/citigroup-suing-a-pawnshop-seriously/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Citigroup suing a pawnshop ... seriously</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/citigroup-suing-a-pawnshop-seriously/">Citigroup suing a pawnshop ... seriously</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 04 Feb 2009 14:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/citigroup-suing-a-pawnshop-seriously/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1450066/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/citigroup-suing-a-pawnshop-seriously/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>citigroup</category><category>inthenews</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>litigation</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 14:30:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
