UNAIDS Urges U.S. to Reconsider South Africa HIV Funding Withdrawal 
Kitron Q2 Revenue Beats Estimates as Defense Demand Lifts Growth 
Novo Nordisk Raises 2026 Outlook on Strong Wegovy Demand 
New Mexico AG Accuses DOJ of Delaying Jeffrey Epstein Ranch Investigation 
US Judge Seeks Explanation for DOJ’s Decision to Drop Gautam Adani Bribery Case 
Fast Retailing Raises Full-Year Forecast After Uniqlo Owner Beats Q3 Profit Estimates 
US-Iran Strikes Escalate as Strait of Hormuz Crisis Pushes Oil Prices Higher 
In a rebuke to Trump, the Supreme Court rules that birthright citizenship is the law of the land 
Gold Prices Fall as US-Iran Conflict, Rising Oil Prices Fuel Fed Rate Concerns 
Alcohol is one of the most dangerous drugs, yet its presence is ubiquitous in social settings and celebrations 
US Egg Producers Settle Price Manipulation Probe, Agree to Pay $3.3 Million and Donate 53 Million Eggs 
Apple Challenges India Antitrust Probe, Says CCI Copied Rivals’ Claims in App Store Case 
Oil Prices Surge as U.S.-Iran Conflict Escalates and Strait of Hormuz Risks Grow 
South Korea’s KOSPI Triggers Trading Curb as AI Chip Stock Selloff Deepens 
TrumpRx Expands Discount Drug Access With 600 Generic Medications 
Australia Consumer Sentiment Rises in July as Fuel Price Relief Lifts Confidence 
Deutsche Bank Fined A$2 Million by ASIC Over OTC Derivatives Reporting Errors 
A Japanese court ruled that an order for restaurant chain operator Global-Dining Inc. to reduce business hours amid the coronavirus pandemic was illegal, as it did not fulfill certain conditions.
Presiding Judge Norihiro Matsuda stated in his decision that it is difficult to acknowledge that Global-Dining enhanced the chance of the virus spreading throughout the community.
He further claimed that because the directive was issued just days before the state of emergency was removed, it had "just a little influence on infection management."
The metropolitan government claims that Global-Dining's commnets on its website caused other eateries to be hesitant to comply with the decree. The court, however, disagreed.
Global-Dining, on the other hand, claims that imposing blanket limits without providing evidence that restaurants are a source of illnesses is a violation of the Constitutional right of corporate freedom.
The firm, which owns and operates dozens of eateries, promptly filed an appeal.
