|
gptkbp:instance_of
|
gptkb:legal_case
|
|
gptkbp:case_analysis
|
gptkb:California
market regulation
|
|
gptkbp:case_filed_against
|
multiple companies
|
|
gptkbp:case_filed_by
|
gptkb:United_States_Department_of_Justice
|
|
gptkbp:case_number
|
CV 06-00245
|
|
gptkbp:case_outcome
|
settlement agreement
industry practices
guilty plea
resolved
fines imposed
|
|
gptkbp:case_significance
|
regulatory scrutiny
semiconductor industry regulation
|
|
gptkbp:case_types
|
civil
|
|
gptkbp:case's_financial_implications
|
significant fines
|
|
gptkbp:case's_historical_context
|
early 2000s antitrust issues
|
|
gptkbp:case's_legal_basis
|
gptkb:Sherman_Act
|
|
gptkbp:case's_legal_focus
|
price-fixing conspiracy
|
|
gptkbp:case's_legal_implications
|
future antitrust enforcement.
|
|
gptkbp:case's_public_impact
|
awareness of antitrust laws
|
|
gptkbp:court
|
gptkb:California
gptkb:United_States
gptkb:United_States_District_Court
gptkb:Infineon_Technologies_AG
cooperation with investigation
|
|
gptkbp:court's_ruling_date
|
2006-01-24
|
|
gptkbp:decided_by
|
gptkb:United_States_District_Court
|
|
gptkbp:defendant's_action
|
collusion
|
|
gptkbp:defendant's_fine
|
$160 million
|
|
gptkbp:defendant's_fine_amount
|
$160 million
|
|
gptkbp:defendant's_headquarters
|
gptkb:Germany
|
|
gptkbp:defendant's_industry
|
gptkb:technology
|
|
gptkbp:defendant's_legal_team
|
law firm representation
|
|
gptkbp:defendant's_market_role
|
semiconductor manufacturer
|
|
gptkbp:economic_impact
|
price increase
|
|
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label
|
United States v. Infineon Technologies
|
|
gptkbp:industry_affected
|
gptkb:Company
|
|
gptkbp:involves
|
antitrust law
|
|
gptkbp:jurisdiction
|
gptkb:United_States
gptkb:United_States_federal_law
federal jurisdiction
|
|
gptkbp:legal_context
|
antitrust litigation
|
|
gptkbp:legal_outcome
|
financial penalties
settlement reached
|
|
gptkbp:legal_principle
|
anti-competitive behavior
|
|
gptkbp:legal_representation
|
gptkb:Police_Department
|
|
gptkbp:major_city
|
$160 million
monitoring compliance
|
|
gptkbp:outcome
|
gptkb:Roman_settlement
|
|
gptkbp:plaintiff's_claim
|
anti-competitive practices
|
|
gptkbp:plaintiff's_goal
|
consumer protection
|
|
gptkbp:plaintiff's_legal_strategy
|
gptkb:court_cases
|
|
gptkbp:plaintiff's_representation
|
government attorney
|
|
gptkbp:precedent
|
antitrust cases
|
|
gptkbp:publication_year
|
2006-01-24
|
|
gptkbp:related_cases
|
United States v. Samsung Electronics
|
|
gptkbp:related_to
|
price-fixing
|
|
gptkbp:resolution
|
out-of-court settlement
|
|
gptkbp:significance
|
antitrust enforcement
|
|
gptkbp:year
|
gptkb:2006
|