US Trade Court Blocks Trump’s 10% Global Tariffs 
X Corp Loses Legal Battle Over Australia Child Safety Fine 
Walmart Stock Falls Despite Strong Q1 Revenue Beat and E-Commerce Growth 
Samsung Union Confirms 18-Day Strike After Failed Wage Talks 
DOJ May Drop Gautam Adani Fraud Charges Amid $10 Billion U.S. Investment Plan 
OpenAI Wins Elon Musk Lawsuit as Jury Rejects Claims Over AI Mission 
China vs U.S. AI Race Shifts Toward Robotics and Manufacturing Power in 2026 
Fed Signals Possible Rate Hikes if Inflation Remains High in 2026 
Dollar Eases as US-Iran Peace Deal Report Impacts Forex and Bond Markets 
Takeda Hit With $885M Verdict Over Amitiza Generic Drug Delay Scheme 
Asian Stocks Slide Ahead of Nvidia Earnings as Tech Shares Tumble 
Chicago U.S. Attorney Drops Charges Against Broadview Protest Defendants 
Anthropic Revenue Surge Signals Strong AI Market Momentum in 2026 
Boeing Wins Fraud Lawsuit Over 737 MAX Filed by LOT Polish Airlines 
Samsung Faces Major Strike Threat as Union Restarts Pay Talks 
Mistral AI Acquires Emmi AI to Expand Industrial AI Solutions in Europe 
US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar urged the US Supreme Court to reject Apple Inc and Broadcom Inc’s appeal of their $1.1 billion trial loss to the California Institute of Technology in a patent infringement case.
Prelogar said the US. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled correctly when it said that the companies could not seek to invalidate Caltech's patents in court after Apple failed to raise its invalidity arguments at the US Patent Office.
Caltech sued Apple and Broadcom in Los Angeles federal court in 2016 for infringing its data-transmission patents in millions of iPhones, iPads, Apple Watches, and other devices with Broadcom Wi-Fi chips.
Caltech has also sued Microsoft Corp, Samsung Electronics Co, Dell Technologies Inc, and HP Inc for infringing the same patents in separate cases that are still pending.
A jury in 2020 ordered Apple to pay Caltech $837.8 million and Broadcom to pay $270.2 million. The Federal Circuit took issue with the amount of the award and sent the case back last year for a new trial on damages, which is yet to be scheduled.
