Facebook faces a lawsuit by new shareholders in the social networking company, filed less than a week after its IPO.

The shareholders allege that Facebook misled them by filing untrue statements in legal filings with the S.E.C., failed to prevent such statements from being misleading, and did not properly prepare the documents for prospective shareholders.

While another shareholder sued NASDAQ yesterday over the exchange’s acknowledged trading glitches, but this lawsuit specifically targets Facebook, board members, and investment banks.

That didn’t take long.

A class action lawsuit was filed yesterday against NASDAQ by an individual investor accusing the stock exchange of botching his Facebook stock (FB) orders on the day of the IPO.

Plaintiff Phillip Goldberg alleges that he “placed purchase and cancellation orders for Facebook’s stock that NASDAQ failed to promptly and accurately execute” last Friday, May 18, 2012, causing he and scores of other investors to suffer losses on their trades (view the lawsuit below).

Facebook’s IPO on Friday brought with it problems for NASDAQ.

The exchange’s CEO Robert Greifeld acknowledged that NASDAQ had a host of trading glitches on the day of the IPO, including a foul-up with the trading system’s ability to handle order cancellations.

Now, NASDAQ’s admission of its Facebook faux pas prompted an S.E.C. inquiry, and securities class action lawyers are prospecting for clients.

Judges often juggle hefty caseloads, particularly in intellectual property litigation.

Knowing this, lawyers serve their clients well by making concise, memorable, and effective arguments.

Take Cal Tech’s attorneys, for example. On Friday, they told the U.S. International Trade Commission (‘ITC’) that “RIM’s mobile phones and tablets are not essential to the public’s health and welfare and are hardly comparable to nuclear devices or burn beds.”

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down three decisions: Astrue v. Capato, Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd., and Holder v. Martinez Gutierrez. In both Capato and Martinez Gutierrez, the Court relied on the doctrine known as Chevron deference in reaching its decision.

We have some interesting employment law cases this week.

At the intersection of employment, civil rights, and religious freedom comes Hamilton v. Southland Christian School, Inc. from the 11th Circuit. In that case, a small Christian school had fired a teacher after she had sought maternity leave, purportedly because she had conceived the child before her recent marriage. On appeal, the 11th Circuit reversed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the school on Hamilton’s Title VII pregnancy discrimination claim, finding that Hamilton had presented sufficient evidence that the decision to fire her was more about her pregnancy and request for maternity leave, instead of her admission concerning premarital sex. As such, the Court ruled that resolving this genuine issue of material fact should be reserved for the jury.

Sure, California may be facing a $15.7 billion deficit, but the Facebook IPO has Sacramento singing, “Goodbye grey sky, hello blue.”

State senator Michael J. Rubio already has plans on how to spend the expected bump to the state’s coffers.

A new class-action lawsuit accuses Apple of raining on iCloud users’ service, charging that the company’s promise that “migrating from MobileMe to iCould would be ‘effortless’ was one of many “misrepresentations” to consumers.

The lawsuit alleges that Apple duped MobileMe customers into believing that they would get a newer, improved service, but that “their forced migration to the iCloud platform” has resulted in them “not be[ing] able to access the features they were promised by Apple.”

STMicroelectronics, a Swiss maker of Micro-Electric-Mechanical Systems (‘MEMS’) for accelerometers and gyroscopes in consumer products like iPads and iPhones filed a patent infringement lawsuit today against competitor InvenSense, Inc.

ST’s lawsuit alleges that Sunnyvale, California-based InvenSense is infringing nine (9) of the company’s patents being used in consumer electronic devices like gyroscopes and a “free-fall detection and free-fall protection system for portable electronics,” in addition to other MEMS patents.

Last Monday, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. released a revised budget for the State of California. Initially, Governor Brown had estimated a $9.2 billion budget shortfall for 2012-13, but this sum increased to $15.7 billion “as a result of a reduced revenue outlook, higher costs to fund schools, and decisions by the federal government and courts to block budget cuts.” To bridge the gap, the Governor is proposing to “increase[] the personal income tax on the state’s wealthiest taxpayers for seven years and increase[] the sales tax by one-quarter percent for four years.”

Currently, the California personal income tax rate is capped at 9.30%. Under The Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012, the tax rate will increase as follows.