Apple 2004 Annual Report Download - page 21

Apple Corps Ltd. v. Apple Computer, Inc.; Apple Computer, Inc. v. Apple Corps Ltd.
Plaintiff Apple Corps filed this action on July 4, 2003 in the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, in London alleging that the Company has
breached a 1991 agreement that resolved earlier trademark litigation between the parties regarding use of Apple marks. Plaintiff seeks an
injunction, unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed a motion on October 13, 2003, challenging jurisdiction in the UK, but the
Court denied the motion on April 7, 2004. The Company filed an appeal of the Court's decision but subsequently withdrew the appeal and is
preparing its defense in this matter.
On October 8, 2003, the Company filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California requesting a
declaratory judgment that the Company has not breached the 1991 agreement. Apple Corps challenged jurisdiction in the California case but the
Court denied that challenge on March 25, 2004. Apple Corps subsequently prevailed on a motion to stay the California case during the pendency
of the UK action. The Company has dismissed the California lawsuit without prejudice.
Cagney v. Apple Computer, Inc.
Plaintiff filed this purported class action on January 9, 2004 in Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleging improper collection of sales tax in
transactions involving mail-in rebates. The complaint alleges violations of California Civil Code Section 17200 (unfair competition) and seeks
unspecified damages and other relief. The Company was served on January 21, 2004, and filed an answer on February 20, 2004, denying all
allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company is investigating these allegations. The Company filed a motion to
disqualify Plaintiff's counsel, which the Court denied. The Company filed a petition for a writ of mandate with respect to this ruling and the
Court of Appeal has issued an order to show cause as to why the writ should not issue. Plaintiffs lead counsel subsequently withdrew. The
hearing on the show cause order is scheduled for January 29, 2005. The Company also has obtained an opinion on the tax issue from the State
Board of Equalization.
Compression Labs, Inc. v. Apple Computer, Inc., et al.; Apple v. Compression Labs, Inc., et al.
Plaintiff Compression Labs, Inc. filed this patent infringement action on April 22, 2004 against the Company and twenty-seven other defendants
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. patent 4,698,672. Plaintiff
alleges that the Company infringes the patent by complying with the JPEG standard as defined by CCITT Recommendation T.81 entitled
"Information Technology—Digital Compression and Coding of Continuous Tone Still Images—Requirements and Guidelines." Plaintiff seeks
unspecified damages and other relief. The Company is investigating this claim. Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative,
to transfer the case to Delaware. The case is in discovery and trial is expected in October 2005. On July 2, 2004, the Company and several other
defendants in the Texas action filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court in Delaware requesting declaratory judgment of
noninfringement, invalidity, implied license and unenforceability with respect to the '672 patent. Additional actions regarding this patent have
been filed in other jurisdictions. A petition has been filed with the Panel on Multi-
District Litigation (MDL), seeking coordination and transfer of
all of these cases to one court for pre-trial proceedings.
Craft v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed December 23, 2003, Santa Clara County Superior Court); Chin v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed December 23,
2003, San Mateo County Superior Court); Hughes v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed December 23, 2003, Santa Clara County Superior Court);
Westley v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed December 26, 2003, San Francisco County Superior Court); Keegan v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed
December 30, 2003, Alameda County Superior Court); Wagya v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed February 19, 2004, Alameda County Superior
Court); Yamin v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed February 24, 2004, Los Angeles County Superior Court); Kieta v. Apple Computer, Inc. (filed
July 8, 2004, Alameda County Superior Court)
Eight separate plaintiffs filed purported class action cases in various California courts alleging misrepresentations by the Company relative to
iPod battery life. The complaints include causes of action
18