Samsung took a double-hit in its battle against archrival Apple on Tuesday, when the European Union announced it would investigate whether it was illegally trying to hinder competitors and Germany blocked sales of some of its tablet computers.

Samsung Electronics and Apple Inc. are engaged in a strategic war over patents in many countries across the world as they try to draw market share away from each other.

The EU's antitrust watchdog thinks the South Korean company may be overstepping the bounds and launched a formal investigation into whether Samsung is using law suits over key patents on 3G wireless technology to hinder competitors — including Apple.

The European Commission, which is acting as the EU's antitrust enforcer, said it suspected Samsung of not giving other companies fair access to patents it holds on standardized 3G technology for mobile devices — despite committing to do so in 1998.

A spokeswoman for the Commission said the probe also affected tablets such as Apple's newest iPad, which uses standardized wireless 3G technology.

The Commission said that Samsung last year sought legal injunctions against other device makers in several EU states, alleging patent infringement.

Under EU patent rules, a company that hold patents for standardized products are required to license them out indiscriminately at a fair price.

If Samsung is found guilty of unfairly restraining competition, it can be fined up to 10 percent of annual revenue related to the investigation.

The Supreme Court declined Wednesday to extend constitutional safeguards against the use of some eyewitness testimony at criminal trials, despite concerns that eyewitness identification plays a key role in innocent people going to prison.

In a case dealing with a narrow slice of the issue of identifying a suspect, the court voted 8-1 to uphold the theft conviction of Barion Perry in New Hampshire state court. Perry argued that courts should be able to exclude eyewitness testimony when identifications are made under suggestive circumstances, even when there is no evidence of manipulation by the police.

Judges already can bar testimony when the police do something to influence a witness to identify a suspect.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in her opinion for the court that in cases with no police misconduct, lawyers can cross-examine a witness and juries can weigh the reliability of the testimony.

Ginsburg said a prime reason for excluding such testimony when the police are involved is deterrence. "Where there is no improper police conduct, there is nothing to deter," she said.

The Vermont Supreme Court says information used by towns to calculate adjustments to residents' property taxes should remain private.

In an entry order published Friday, the court reversed a Bennington County Superior Court ruling that said the town of Manchester should provide the tax information to someone who requested it.

The issue involves the amount Vermont property tax payers may have deducted from their bills based on their income, school property tax burden and if they to use a portion of their tax refund to reduce property taxes.

The state Department of Taxes calculates that amount and sends it to towns to reduce a property owner's taxes.

The Supreme Court says the law governing the deductions is covered by the state's privacy laws. Property tax bills are, however, public.

The court decision is posted on the town website, http://www.manchester-vt.gov