A federal appeals court has rejected a lawsuit accusing Abbott Laboratories of antitrust violations over a sudden 400-percent price hike of a popular AIDS drug.

Advocacy groups and drug benefit providers sued Abbott in 2004. They alleged the North Chicago, Ill., drugmaker raised the price of the HIV-fighting Norvir to stifle competition and boost sales of its own alternative, Kaletra.

The company paid $10 million to settle the lawsuit and agreed to let the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals still determine if the price hike was an illegal business practice.

The court ruled in Abbott's favor Tuesday. If it had lost, Abbott would have had to pay an additional $17.5 million.

A lawyer for the advocacy groups says they're weighing whether to appeal the decision.

Struggling automotive parts supplier Lear Corp. said it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after receiving the support it needed from lenders and bondholders.

The company, which makes automotive seating systems and electronics, had been negotiating with its lenders and bondholders for additional support for its restructuring plan. It previously received a commitment for $500 million in loans to finance its bankruptcy from a group of lenders led by J.P. Morgan and Citigroup.

Lear said it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Subsidiaries outside the U.S. and Canada are not part of the filings, the company said.

Lear has asked the bankruptcy court to allow it to continue to provide pay and benefits for its workers without interruption and to continue to allow it to provide payments for its U.S. and Canada pensions.

It plans to present its restructuring plan to the court within 60 days.

The Southfield, Mich.-based company's filing, which had been expected since last week, makes it the first major automotive parts maker to seek court protection since Visteon Corp., the former parts arm of Ford Motor Co., filed for Chapter 11 in May. Parts suppliers have been hammered by the recession as consumers continue to shun new car purchases and automakers slash production.

Lear's troubles stem partly from its heavy dependence on the slumping North American and European auto markets, with 36 percent of its sales coming from North America and 49 percent coming from Europe.

Lear, which posted $13.6 billion in sales for 2008, is a key supplier for both General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. The pair represent the company's two largest customers and account for a combined 40 percent of its sales.

Lear is also one of Ford's key component and service suppliers, part of Ford's Aligned Business Framework, which increases the automaker's collaboration with the companies.

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor earned a "well-qualified" rating from the American Bar Association on Tuesday as she prepared for Senate hearings next week.

The ABA committee that reviewed her qualifications came out with that unanimous rating of the federal appeals court judge and released it in a letter to White House lawyer Greg Craig.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to begin hearings Monday on President Barack Obama's choice to replace retired Justice David Souter.

Sotomayor has been rated twice before by the ABA — as a trial judge and appellate judge.

As a U.S. District Court nominee, she was deemed "qualified" by a substantial majority of the committee and "well qualified" by a minority. The last time the ABA reviewed Sotomayor's qualifications — when she was up for the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — a majority rated her "well qualified," but that was not unanimous.

For more than 50 years, the ABA has evaluated the credentials of nominees for the federal bench, though the nation's largest lawyers' group has no official role in the process. Supreme Court nominees get the most scrutiny.

"The American Bar Association's unanimous, well-qualified rating of Judge Sotomayor is further evidence of the outstanding experience she will bring to the Supreme Court," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"The ABA's rating — an evaluation of integrity, professional competence, and judicial temperament — should eliminate the doubts of naysayers who have questioned Judge Sotomayor's disposition on the bench."

ABA ratings are "well-qualified," "qualified" and "not qualified." The committee's members interview hundreds of colleagues — confidentially — and scours pages of a nominee's writings before coming up with the rating.

"The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has completed its evaluation of the Honorable Sonia Sotomayor and is of the unanimous opinion that Judge Sotomayor is 'well-qualified' for appointment as an associate justice to the United States Supreme Court," said Kim J. Askew, the committee's head.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito also got unanimous a "well-qualified" rating from the ABA before their Senate hearings.

White House lawyer Harriet Miers, nominated to the high court by President George W. Bush, withdrew before the ABA released its rating.

The ABA had a rocky relationship with Bush. In 2001, Bush ended the ABA's preferential role in checking prospective judicial nominees and decided the administration would not give the group advance word on names under consideration.

Conservatives had been bitter ever since the ABA's mixed review of the qualifications of failed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork in the Reagan administration.

In March, the Obama administration asked the ABA to resume its historical role in evaluating judicial nominees.

A central Minnesota woman ordered to pay $1.92 million for illegally sharing copyright-protected music is asking a federal judge to reduce the damages she must pay or grant a new trial, while the recording industry is taking steps to make sure she doesn't share music again.

Last month, a federal jury ruled Jammie Thomas-Rasset, 32, willfully violated the copyrights on 24 songs, and that she must pay $80,000 per song. In documents filed Monday in U.S. District Court, attorney Kiwi Camara argued this amount is "grossly excessive."

Camara asked that the court either remove the statutory damages from the judgment, order that the damages be reduced to the statutory minimum — which would result in a total award of $18,000 — or grant a new trial altogether.

"The plaintiffs did not even attempt to offer evidence of their actual injuries, seeking, instead, an award of statutory damages entirely for purposes of punishment and deterrence," Camara wrote, adding that the $1.92 million figure "shocks the conscience and must be set aside."

He also wrote that civil penalties must relate to a defendant's own conduct and the injury she caused to the plaintiffs. Instead, he said, it seems the damages were awarded not because what Thomas-Rasset did, but because of "the widespread and generalized problem of illegal music downloading."

Camara wrote that if a new trial isn't ordered, Thomas-Rasset would appeal based on evidence he argued should not have been allowed at trial.

This case was the only one of more than 30,000 similar lawsuits to make it all the way to trial. The vast majority of people targeted by the music industry had settled for about $3,500 each. The recording industry has said it stopped filing such lawsuits last August and is instead working with Internet service providers to fight the worst offenders.

A U.S.-trained Pakistani scientist accused of helping al-Qaida has repeatedly interrupted her competency hearing to declare her innocence and insist she's not anti-American.

The outbursts came during a daylong hearing in federal court in Manhattan to decide whether 37-year-old Aafia Siddiqui is competent to stand trial.

She is charged with attempted murder and assault. The U.S. government says she grabbed a gun and fired at U.S. soldiers and FBI agents in Afghanistan last summer. She shouted in court Monday that she did not shoot anyone.

She also said she's not really against America and never was.

The outbursts came as psychologists testified whether she is fit for an October trial. The judge said he'll decide that later.

General Motors cleared a major hurdle toward a quick exit from bankruptcy as a judge approved a government-backed plan to create a "new GM" that sheds major debts of the ailing Detroit automaker.

The ruling released late Sunday paves the way for a "reinvention" of GM, which filed for bankruptcy protection on June 1 and has vowed to emerge as a leaner, more profitable company once freed from its burdensome debts.

Judge Robert Gerber said he had examined about 850 objections to the restructuring plan raised by GM bondholders and others, but found there were "no realistic alternatives" to the asset sale.

"As nobody can seriously dispute, the only alternative to an immediate sale is liquidation -- a disastrous result for GM's creditors, its employees, the suppliers who depend on GM for their own existence, and the communities in which GM operates," Gerber wrote.

GM hailed the decision as "another step toward the launch of an independent new GM."

GM president and chief executive Fritz Henderson added that now "it's our responsibility to fix this business and place the company on a clear path to success without delay."

The judge said GM could implement the plan as soon as Thursday at 1600 GMT pending any additional delay imposed by an appellate court.

At least one appeal had been filed Monday, from accident victims seeking to hold the new GM accountable for any product liability damages.

Once the world's largest corporation, the new GM will emerge as a significantly smaller automaker with fewer brands and employees, and a diminished global footprint.

GM's plan seeks to follow the script of Chrysler, which spent 42 days in bankruptcy protection before emerging as a new company run by Italy's Fiat.

As with Chrysler, GM's old corporate entity will remain under supervision of the bankruptcy court, but the new GM will not be burdened by the lengthy process.

A U.S.-trained Pakistani scientist accused of helping al-Qaida and shooting at FBI agents in Afghanistan has been forced to appear in Manhattan court by a judge's order.

Aafia Siddiqui (ah-FEE'-uh see-DEE'-kee) kept her hands folded as she entered court Monday surrounded by marshal's deputies. When the judge said that she was presumed innocent, she shook her head in apparent disagreement.

U.S. District Judge Richard Berman said he would not rule on whether Siddiqui is competent to stand trial, but would hear the testimony of mental health experts.

Psychologists for both prosecutors and the defense say Siddiqui has claimed she saw some of her children in her cell. They say seemed especially disturbed by required strip searches.

Berman has entered a not guilty plea for her.