A U.S. judge has thrown out a lawsuit challenging the fairness of how Web search leader Google Inc. calculates the popularity of Web sites in determining search results, court papers show.

In a ruling issued Friday that came to light Tuesday, Judge Jeremy Fogel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed a lawsuit against Google by parenting information site KinderStart.

The judge also imposed yet-to-be-determined sanctions on KinderStart legal counsel Gregory Yu for making unsupported allegations against Google.

KinderStart sued Google in March 2006 alleging the Mountain View, California-based Internet company had defamed the site by cutting it from its Web search ranking system.

The Norwalk, Connecticut-based company, which features links to information about raising children, accused Google of violations of antitrust, free speech, unfair competition and defamation and libel laws.

In its suit, the company argued its site's sudden demotion in March 2005 to a "zero" ranking in Google's search system had severely harmed its business.

KinderStart had sought class action status on behalf of what is said were many other sites that suffered the same fate as Google fine-tunes Web site rankings in search results.

"KinderStart had failed to explain how Google caused injury to it by a provably false statement ... as distinguished from an unfavorable opinion about KinderStart.com's importance," the judge's ruling states.

In addition, the judge said the plaintiff's counsel should have removed allegations that Google discriminated against or manipulated its Web search rankings after the judge ordered the lawyer to do so in an interim ruling.

"While Yu has brought a novel challenge to a major corporation, it is apparent that to some extent he has overreached in doing so," Fogel said. "Yu had a professional responsibility to refrain from filing such allegations if he did not have appropriate supporting evidence."

The judge granted Google the right to seek attorneys fees for the costs of defending against these specific charges. Both sides have 14 days to file motions before the judge determines monetary damages against Yu.

Yu is with the firm Global Law Group of San Mateo.

"All options are being explored. That's all that we are going to say at this point," he told Reuters, but declined to describe his plans further.

A Google attorney said the company felt vindicated.

"We always felt these claims were unjustified, because courts have consistently rejected complaints over search engine rankings, so we're pleased that Judge Fogel promptly dismissed this case," Google litigation counsel Hilary Ware said in a company statement.

The US Navy on Tuesday played its "state secrets" joker in ongoing attempts to resist a whale-saving lawsuit by an environmental group.

The group bringing the lawsuit, the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC), believes high-powered naval sonar can distress, injure, or kill whales and dolphins. It is also suggested that active sonar pulses can disorient cetaceans and cause them to become stranded or lost.

Secretary for the Navy Donald Winter said in a court filing that the plaintiffs' requests for disclosure, if complied with, "could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to national security".

According to the Navy, the conservationists had requested information on the latitude, longitude, time and date, duration, and name of the exercise for every non-combat use of military sonar by the US Navy anywhere in the world.

The NRDC describes itself as "the US nation's most effective environmental action organisation", and it doesn't intend to let the navy get away with the state secrets ploy.

The memos, organized as charts with entries for each of the federal prosecutors and labeled "for internal DOJ use only," offer new details about disputes over policy, priorities and management styles between the department and several of its U.S. attorneys.

The prosecutors' shortcomings also were listed in a talking-points memo, indicating the willingness of the Justice Department to make public what are normally confidential personnel matters in order to counter its critics.

Justice Department officials hoped that documenting specific reasons for terminating the prosecutors would satisfy demands for more information after Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales and his deputy, Paul J. McNulty, described the dismissals as vaguely "performance-related."

According to the charts, as well as e-mails and other documents made public Monday and Tuesday, Carol C. Lam in San Diego was dismissed for not prosecuting more firearms and border smuggling cases, and for repeatedly missing deadlines.

David C. Iglesias in Albuquerque traveled so much he was considered an "absentee landlord."

In San Francisco, where Kevin Ryan was fired, "the office has become the most fractured office in the nation, morale has fallen to the point that it is harming our prosecutorial efforts and [Ryan] has lost the confidence of many of the career prosecutors who are leaving the office."

The justification was equally sweeping for Paul Charlton in Phoenix: "Repeated instances of insubordination, actions taken contrary to instructions, and actions that were clearly unauthorized."

As for Margaret M. Chiara in Grand Rapids, Mich., the memo advised saying nothing about her dismissal because she had not made public statements in her defense. But the memo also said that "if pushed," the department should say morale in her office was low and that Chiara had lost the support of her staff.

The documents show that in a separate chain of e-mails, former White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers mused in November, a month before the firings, about whether President Bush should be briefed about the terminations.

Its creator remained anonymous.

But for political strategists, ad experts, even journalists, the ad presents a series of other fundamental unknowns.

- How will Web content outside the control of campaigns affect voters?

- How should campaigns react to anonymous but highly viewed attacks?

- When is Web content, no matter how provocative, newsworthy?

As the Internet looks more and more like an electronic community, politicians are increasingly devoting resources to their Web sites, planting themselves in electronic gathering places such as Facebook.com and MySpace.com and posting their videos on YouTube.

With some exceptions, however, what draws viewers is content that politicians don't control. A video clip of former Sen. John Edwards combing his hair to the dubbed-in tune of "I Feel Pretty" has drawn more than 150,000 views. A clip of Clinton singing a slightly off-key version of the Star-Spangled Banner has drawn more than 1 million views.

What's more, Internet content does not have to meet the strict reporting standards that television and radio ads must observe. That makes the Web the medium of choice for stealthy tactics by partisans operating outside the campaigns.

For candidates caught in the crosshairs, one way to respond is to brush it off, preferably with humor.

Asked about the Macintosh video on Tuesday, Clinton said: "I'm just happy if it's taking attention away from my singing. My singing was bad enough. I'm just happy that nobody is tuning in to that."

Harmon denied a motion in February, filed by defendants Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse, to delay the trial pending the outcome of the certification appeal to the Fifth Circuit. The case is still scheduled to resume on April 16. In January, Harmon dismissed seven defendants from the class action suit, including late ex-Enron CEO Ken Lay. Lay, convicted in May of fraud and conspiracy charges for providing investors with false and misleading financial information from 1999 up until Enron filed bankruptcy in late 2001, died suddenly of a heart attack in July.

Oracle shares surged ahead in after-hours trading on Tuesday after the software company reported a 35% jump in third-quarter profits, boosted by its new portfolio of acquisitions and licensing deals.

Oracle (nasdaq: ORCL - news - people ) said strong sales of its applications, which helps businesses maximize efficiency and manage finances, raised earnings for the period that ended Feb.28, to $1.03 billion, or 20 cents per share, from $765 million, or 14 cents per share, for the corresponding period a year ago. On the continuing operations basis, Oracle reported 25 cents per share, solidly beating the Street consensus of 23 cents a share and the company’s December guidance.

The software maker’s shares were up 2.74%, 48 cents, to $18.03 during after-market trading on Tuesday.

After a lackluster second quarter, Oracle managed to secure a slew of new licensing contracts as consumers warmed up to the company’s acquisition strategy.

“There was a lot of consumers on the fence,” said Trip Chowdry, a software analyst for Global Equities Research, in an interview. “They wondered, 'Is Oracle putting enough muscle behind their acquisitions?' Clearly, Oracle has done a strong outreach program to alleviate consumer concerns.”

In a controversial shift in strategy, founder and chief executive officer, Larry Ellison started to gobble up boutique software outfits a few years ago. In three years, Oracle has acquired some 30 companies and put over $23 billion on the line. While it is the reigning database software maker, it is eager to grab market share from SAP (nyse: SAP - news - people ), the top business applications provider.

A short list of frequently used acronyms and terms relevant to LLMs.

ABA – The American Bar Association, a bar association of lawyers based in Washington D.C., which sets widely adopted standards for legal education and professional legal practice in the United States. This organization also provides perhaps the most influential accreditation for law schools nationwide.

ETS – Educational Testing Service, a US-based non-profit organization widely known for producing standardized exams such as the TOEFL, which is a common requirement for non-native English-speaking applicants to law schools in the United States and abroad.

FAFSA – Free Application for Federal Student Aid is a form submitted by students of US universities who are seeking financial aid from the US government. The FAFSA form is designed to ascertain a student’s Expected Family Contribution (EFC), a figure that determines which need-based government grants and subsidized loans a student can apply for.

GPA – Stands for Grade Point Average, the most common quantitative measure of overall undergraduate academic achievement.

IELTS – International English Language Testing System, a common, English-language proficiency exam. Many English-speaking universities and law schools in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa request that non-native English speakers submit satisfactory IELTS results when applying.

JD – Abbreviation for the Latin term Juris Doctor, used in the United States to refer to professional law degree that the vast majority of LL.M students acquire before embarking on their LL.M. degree. Although it is mostly considered to be a postgraduate degree -- completed after undergraduate studies -- it is not actually a doctorate degree as the name might suggest.

Joint Degree / Dual Degree Program - Refers to programs offered by some universities in which students can pursue two degrees simultaneously. Common dual degree programmes include those leading to a combined J.D. / LL.M., or a joint Master’s degree program, such as a combined LL.M. / MBA.

LLB – Refers to Bachelor of Laws, the term used throughout much of the English-speaking world (though not the United States, where the term Juris Doctor is broadly used) to refer to the academic degree leading to professional practice in law. The LL.B is most often a three-year degree pursued after the completion of an undergraduate / bachelor’s degree. Possession of an LL.B. or J.D. degree is a requirement for candidacy for the bar association or law society, and often for participation in an LL.M. program.

LSAC – The Law School Admissions Council (LSAC) is a US-based non-profit organization whose membership includes over 200 US and Canadian law schools. The LSAC administers the LSAT exam. It also operates the Law School Data Assembly Service (LSDAS).

LSDAS – The Law School Data Assembly Service (LSDAS) is operated by the LSAC. The LSDAS collects application material (including test scores, undergraduate transcripts, essays, and letters of recommendation) from law school applicants. The LSAC then compiles this information into reports, which it sends directly to law schools on behalf of the applicant. Some law schools in the United States require that applicants use this paid service. The LSAC also provides an LL.M. Credential Assembly Service for international students intending to apply for LL.M. programs in the United States.

LSAT – Otherwise known as the Law School Admissions Test, the LSAT is a standarized exam the results of which are required for admission into most law schools in North America. LSAT results are currently only required from applicants to J.D. programs, and generally not from applicants to LL.M. programs who have already completed their first law degree.

TOEFL – Stands for the Test of English as a Foreign Language. The TOEFL is a standardized examination of English-language proficiency that non-native English-speaking applicants must often take before acceptance to English-speaking universities. The test is administered by the Educational Testing Service.