Search for: "STRIP TECHNOLOGY INC."
Results 1 - 20
of 256
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Mar 2011, 7:53 am
New Albany, IN - Patent lawyers for CSP Technologies, Inc. of Auburn, AL, filed a patent infringement suit alleging Sud-Chemie AG of Munich, Germany; Sud-Chemie, Inc., of Louisville, KY; and Airsec S.A.S. of Choisy-le-Roi, France infringed Patent No. 7,537, 137, titled RESEALABLE MOISTURE TIGHT CONTAINER ASSEMBLY FOR STRIPS AND THE LIKE HAVING A LIP SNAP SEAL, as issued by the U.S. [read post]
13 Aug 2014, 12:14 pm
Indianapolis, Indiana - Indiana patent attorneys for Polymer Technology Systems, Inc. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 11:13 am
The confusing labelling may lead customers to believe they can use these test strips with the Advocate Redi-Code blood glucose meters, model numbers TD-3223E, TD-4223E, TD-4223F, TD-4276 manufactured by Taidoc Technology Corp which could result in incorrect glucose results. [read post]
18 May 2011, 7:10 pm
On May 17, 2011, CSP Technologies, Inc. [read post]
22 Nov 2013, 12:00 am
On appeal, the Federal Circuit relied on Quanta Computer, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 12:00 pm
The vast majority of LifeScan's customers now use OneTouch Ultra Brand Meters, which use an entirely different technology. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 10:00 pm
Uber Technologies Inc. , the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 10:00 pm
Uber Technologies Inc. , the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 10:00 pm
Uber Technologies Inc. , the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 10:00 pm
Uber Technologies Inc. , the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 10:00 pm
Uber Technologies Inc. , the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 10:00 pm
Uber Technologies Inc. , the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. [read post]
30 Apr 2023, 2:06 pm
Uber Technologies, Inc., Docket No. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 10:29 am
Tuscan Inc., No. [read post]
20 Sep 2013, 12:50 pm
It alleges willful infringement of CSP's patented technology relating to packaging for, among other things, the diagnostic-test-strip market. [read post]
21 Jul 2023, 5:39 pm
Uber Technologies to address this issue. [read post]
24 May 2023, 10:05 am
” Thus, the employee is not stripped of standing “simply because he or she has been compelled to arbitrate his or her individual PAGA claim. [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 6:54 am
In Re: Wright Medical Technology Inc. [read post]
9 Nov 2010, 7:07 am
If there are representational avatars instead of real naked people — a software fix devised by scanner makers L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. and OSI Systems Inc. [read post]
28 Feb 2013, 8:00 am
The resolution of the Compete matter is further evidence of the FTC’s firm stance on tracking technologies as well as its focus on disclosure, consent, and security as touchstones of best practices in this area. [read post]
