James Bullard said he dissented on this week's Fed decision to lower rates by a quarter percentage point because he didn't think the cut was big enough.The Fedread more
More than 400 Chinese products will be temporarily exempted from tariffs that President Donald Trump's administration imposed last year.China Economyread more
"I feel like I've contributed all I can to this primary election," he told MSNBC's "Morning Joe." "And it's clearly not my time. So I'm going to end my presidential campaign."2020 Electionsread more
Apple will get a taste of whether upgraded features on the new iPhone 11 are enough to lure shoppers to retail stores around the world as the new smartphones officially hit...Technologyread more
The complaint made by an unnamed intelligence official about the president centers on Ukraine, the Washington post reported.Politicsread more
Apple CEO Tim Cook greeted iPhone 11 customers at the reopening of the Fifth Avenue Apple store on Friday. CNBC also took a tour inside. Here's a look.Technologyread more
The Pentagon on Thursday said the recent attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities were "sophisticated" and represented a "dramatic escalation" in tensions within the region.Defenseread more
U.S. stock futures are modestly higher, with the S&P 500 just a little more than 20 points away from July's all-time high ahead of Friday's open on Wall Street.Marketsread more
Bank of America says Amazon's plans to build its own fleet of carbon-neutral delivery trucks bode well for its bottom line.Investingread more
The show comes as social media platforms and legacy media companies alike have launched a flurry of original content alongside new streaming platforms like Apple TV+ and...Technologyread more
Pivotal Research Group began coverage of Roku with a sell rating on FridayInvestingread more
The antitrust lawsuit against Apple is on its last legs after a federal judge dismissed the plaintiffs' last remaining witness.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said Monday she was "concerned" and "troubled" by the remaining plaintiffs' witness in the class action case.
The judge scolded the plaintiffs in court, calling witness Marianna Rosen "inadequate" since the suit was brought by her husband's law firm, and ordered the plaintiffs lead attorney Bonny Sweeney to produce a new witness for Tuesday's court session, in Oakland, California.
The issue is that Rosen and her attorneys did not provide complete information about the iPods she introduced as evidence. And that came to light only after Apple's legal team argued that the devices she purchased were not among those affected by the lawsuit.
Apple's lead attorney William Isaacson suggested the case should be thrown out, but the judge said the merits of the class-action case should still go before the jury.
Read MoreWhy Apple shares could hit $135
The case, which was initially filed over a decade ago, concerns older versions of Apple's iPod music devices. Those iPods played only songs bought from the iTunes stores or songs downloaded from compact discs—not from rival companies.
The plaintiffs allege Apple's behavior was anticompetitive, and they are seeking damages of at least $350 million, though if the company is found to have violated antitrust laws it could be ordered to pay more than $1 billion.
Monday's court testimony was dominated by a Stanford economist who produced a detailed study, paid for by the plaintiffs legal team.
Professor Roger Noll testified that Apple tried to maintain an illegal monopoly on digital music from 2006 to 2009.
But the drama came later, when Judge Gonazlez Rogers' castigated the plaintiffs. Still, the judge said Apple's own records show that there are at least 8 million consumers who purchased iPods, and their interests were still at stake in the trial.
The judge questioned whether she would be able to accept a jury verdict without a remaining named plaintiff. Apple contends that without a named plaintiff the case can't continue.
"This $1 billion case is now about one half of two iPods," Isaacson said in a court filing.
Gonzalez Rogers can decide there is no case after the jury reaches a verdict. In that event, Isaacson said, "the verdict is null and void no matter who wins."