Yahoo News: A court entered a default judgment against PepsiCo for $1.26 billion after the company failed to file an answer to a lawsuit alleging that PepsiCo stole an idea for bottled water. Lawyers for PepsiCo convinced the judge to set the judgment aside and allow the company to defend the lawsuit on its merits.
Arizona Republic: “Radical Bunny LLC, an obscure Phoenix firm federal and state regulators say defrauded investors out of almost $200 million, has reached a partial settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The agreement, filed last week in federal court, could preserve some money for the firm’s 900-plus investors, who are trying to recover their losses from Radical Bunny’s pending Chapter 11 bankruptcy case.”
Bloomberg.com: “Pfizer paid the largest criminal fine in U.S. history: $1.19 billion. On the same day, it paid $1 billion to settle civil cases involving the off-label promotion of Bextra and three other drugs with the U.S. and 49 states. . . . Across the U.S., pharmaceutical companies have been pleading guilty to criminal charges or paying penalties in civil cases when the U.S. Department of Justice finds that they deceptively marketed drugs for unapproved uses, putting millions of people at risk of chest infections, heart attacks, suicidal impulses or death.”
Wall St. Journal: “At long last, business-method patents will have their moment in the spotlight. The Supreme Court on Monday will take up the issue, holding arguments in the In Re Bilski case, which has been on our radar screen for nearly two years.”
Arizona based Xcentric Ventures, LLC, owner of the www.ripoffreport.com won a lawsuit filed by In Intellect Art Multimedia, Inc., against Matthew Milewski and Xcentric Ventures, LLC. The plaintiff sued for defamation after Milewski filed a report on Xcentric’s website critical of the school.
On or about July 19, 2008, a report was posted on ripoffreport.com regarding SFA. In that positing, the author, “Lilly”, accused plaintiff of being a “bait & switch company,” making “false promises,” and being run “by two incompetent (sic) people.”
The court holds that the cause of action for defamation against Milewski must be dismissed because the challenged speech is merely an alleged statement of Milewski’s personal opinion about the quality of services provided by plaintiff.
. . . when viewed in its full context, reveals that Milewski is a disgruntled consumer and that his statements reflect his personal opinion based upon his personal dealing with plaintiff. They are subjective expressions of consumer dissatisfaction with plaintiff and the statements are not actionable because they are Milewski’s personal opinion. Since the statements are protected opinion, the first cause of action is dismissed. . . .
Xcentric is protected by the Communications Decency Act, which provides that “
[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” 47 USCA § 230 (c) (1). Accordingly, the third cause of action is hereby severed and dismissed.