Reset Password


Change Password

Old Password:
New Password:
We have completed your request.

High-Tech Law & Litigation Blog

  • 14
  • June
  • 2018


Share on:

Secret CFIUS Request Spurs Qualcomm Shareholder Suit

On June 8, 2018, Qualcomm shareholders filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of California against Qualcomm Inc., its CEO, and its CFO for, essentially, secretly requesting a Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) review of Broadcom Ltd.’s attempted takeover of Qualcomm. Camp v. Qualcomm Inc., 18-cv-1208 (S.D. Cal. filed June 8, 2018). The CFIUS review, as previously reported by V&E, ultimately led to President Trump’s executive order that ended Broadcom’s takeover efforts.

Read More

European Competition Watchdog Says “Shazam!” and Opens In-Depth Investigation Into Apple-Shazam Deal Over Consumer Data Concerns

In December 2017, Apple announced its intention to purchase UK-based app maker Shazam for $400 million. Shazam is best known for developing one of the most popular music recognition apps, which uses a mobile device’s built-in microphone to listen to and identify songs for the user. Because of Shazam’s relatively low revenue numbers, the proposed acquisition did not contain an “EU dimension” based on certain “turnover” (read: revenue) thresholds set by the EU Merger Regulation, and therefore Apple was not required to notify the European Commission of the deal. However, Apple did report the transaction for regulatory clearance in Austria, where the deal met the national notification thresholds. Subsequently, Austria, joined by several other European countries, requested that the European Commission, the EU’s competition watchdog, examine the acquisition. Under Article 22(1) of the EU Merger Regulation, Member States may ask the Commission to examine a merger that does not have an EU dimension but that may otherwise significantly affect competition in the requesting Member State.

Read More
  • 21
  • March
  • 2018


Share on:

Trump Blocks Qualcomm Acquisition to Preserve U.S. Dominance in 5G and Important Supply Chains (Part 2)

Last Monday, as reported on by V&E, President Trump put an abrupt halt to Singaporean chipmaker Broadcom Ltd.’s efforts to acquire U.S.-based Qualcomm Inc., when he issued an executive order blocking the acquisition for national security reasons. The order followed an investigation into the proposed transaction by the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS” or the “Committee”) which found that the acquisition threatened U.S. leadership in the 5G standards-setting process and could potentially disrupt important Qualcomm product supply chains to U.S. military and government security agencies. The President’s order appears to be another sign of how the U.S. increasingly views a strong domestic technology sector as an integral part of its overall national security strategy.

Read More
  • 15
  • March
  • 2018


Share on:

Trump Blocks Qualcomm Acquisition to Preserve U.S. Dominance in 5G and Important Supply Chains (Part 1)

President Trump, on Monday, issued an executive order prohibiting Broadcom Ltd.’s proposed takeover of Qualcomm Inc., and “any substantially equivalent merger, acquisition, or takeover, whether effected directly or indirectly.” The order stated there was “credible evidence” that a Broadcom-controlled Qualcomm “might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States.” The order also comes on the heels of a letter from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) highlighting security risks involved with the acquisition, including the potential loss of U.S. leadership in the 5G standards-setting process and the disruption of important supply chains. Although not the first time the President has blocked such a transaction, the order appears to reiterate the administration’s focus on maintaining technological leadership in certain technology industries, including those technologies with both a consumer and military purpose.

Read More
  • 12
  • February
  • 2018


Share on:

Update: District Court Sets Aside $300,000 Apple Sanction

Last week, we wrote that Apple found itself in hot water when a federal magistrate imposed a $300,000 sanction against the company for failing to meet a Rule 45 (third-party subpoena) document production deadline in the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) case against Qualcomm Inc. In the sanction order, the magistrate cited a similar sanction against Samsung for untimely document production to Apple in an unrelated suit, Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., No. 11-CV-01846 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2012) [ECF No. 880].

Read More
  • 09
  • February
  • 2018


Share on:

Apple Hit with $300,000 Sanction for Missing Document Production Deadline

The Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) case against Qualcomm Inc. — alleging Qualcomm unlawfully maintained a monopoly in baseband processors — is in the midst of a contentious discovery period that has each side scrambling to subpoena documents from various third parties. Apple Inc. is one such third party and is now in hot water for missing a document production deadline, presumably by 12 days. In response, the Northern District of California magistrate judge sent a message to other third parties by sanctioning Apple to the tune of $300,000 ($25,000 per day). Tech companies may view the sanctions as a blessing or a curse, depending on what end of a subpoena they find themselves on.

Read More


Subscribe for Updates

Receive e-mail updates from the V&E High-Tech Blog team

Top Posts

Follow Us On Linkedin


Jason A. Levine

Jason A. Levine Partner

Jennifer C. Chen

Jennifer C. Chen Partner

Devika Kornbacher

Devika Kornbacher Partner

Marc A. Fuller

Marc A. Fuller Counsel

Thomas W. Bohnett

Thomas W. Bohnett Senior Associate

Megan Coker

Megan Coker Senior Associate

Trey Hebert

Trey Hebert Associate

Howard Lithaw Lim Associate

Elizabeth Krabill McIntyre

Elizabeth Krabill McIntyre Senior Associate

David C. Smith

David C. Smith Counsel

Margaret D. Terwey

Margaret Dunlay Terwey Senior Associate

Ryan B. Will

Ryan Will Associate

Siho (Scott) Yoo

Siho (Scott) Yoo Senior Associate