Search for: "Ex Parte CV" Results 1 - 20 of 720
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Apr 2024, 8:43 am by Eric Goldman
April 24, 2024) Prior Blog Posts on the SAD Scheme Judge Hammers SEC for Lying to Get an Ex Parte TRO–SEC v. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:02 pm by renholding
 The Commission explains that “a defendant can waive constitutional rights as part of a civil settlement. [read post]
25 Jan 2024, 2:51 pm by Kevin LaCroix
[xii]    In addition to finding that Section 533 precludes indemnification for direct liability for retaliation in violation of FEHA, California courts have found that Section 533 applies to wrongful termination and other employment-related theories of liability that “[n]ecessarily implicate willful and intentional conduct on the part of the insured. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 11:47 am by Jason Rantanen
I’ve written here before about how design patent infringement is ill-suited to ex parte adjudication; so too is utility patent adjudication. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 12:59 pm by Holly
Apple Inc., CDCA-8-20-cv-00048 (Masimo’s claims for trade secret misappropriation and declaratory judgment of patent ownership are based on Apple’s hiring of an ex-Masimo employee in 2014 who had significant knowledge of Masimo’s technology). [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 11:44 am by Dennis Crouch
Guest Post from Professors Pamela Samuelson, Christopher Jon Sprigman, and Matthew Sag. [read post]
9 Nov 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
I am pleased to be part of the 2023 conference on SEC Regulation Outside the United States to deliver the Fifth Annual Scott Friestad Memorial Lecture. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 3:01 pm by Daniel J. Gilman
Tim was actually assigned to OPP, if only nominally, during his stint at the FTC a while back—not remembering the details, I see that it was 2011-2013, according to his CV. [read post]
27 Aug 2023, 3:56 pm by Andrew Warren
To remove a case on a “color of office” argument, the removing party bears the burden of establishing what’s called the three-part “Mesa test,” from the Supreme Court case by that name,[5] The three-part test requires the defendant to show they: were an “officer, or any person acting under that officer, of the United States” are facing criminal charges “for or relating to any act under color of such office”; and have raised or… [read post]