Search for: "Matter of Linn" Results 181 - 200 of 219
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 May 2009, 7:19 am
In a pair of opinions - both authored by Judge Linn and released on the same day - the appellate court has provided additional guidance on deciding these transfer issues. [read post]
26 May 2011, 6:59 am by Matt Osenga
  The court should defer to its expertise in this matter. [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 8:21 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Federal Circuit judges Linn and Rader recognize this problem in their dissents to Ariad. (...)In view of the widely held perception that LWD was bad for biotechnology, it might come as surprise to find that major biotechnology companies Amgen, Glaxo Smith Kline, and Abbott all filed amicus briefs in Araid supporting Lilly and retention of LWD. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 8:37 pm
As the '325 patent is therefore invalid for anticipation as a matter of law. 35 U.S.C. [read post]
5 Jan 2008, 5:20 am
Linn County with 201,000 people was also a big win for Obama, although the demographic variations are not as pronounced as the other counties. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 11:04 am by Jon L. Gelman
.; Carmelina Cartei, Women and Gender Studies Program at Hunter College, CUNY; Tara Finneran, Bronx Arts Ensemble Teaching Artist; Rob Linné,* Adelphi University; Sharon Papp, Adelphi University; Kimberly Schiller, Huntington Public Schools, N.Y. [read post]
21 May 2011, 10:45 pm
The two cases cover the same subject matter. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 10:51 am
The district court explained that the terms of the settlement agreement explicitly precluded Datamars from opposing the motion for reconsideration in any way, thus eliminating any adversity between the parties on all matters before the district court. [read post]
16 Apr 2011, 5:19 pm
No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue. [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 8:15 pm
A patent is invalid for obviousness "if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 1:11 pm
CLS Bank (CAFC 2011-1301) precedential; Judges Linn (author), Prost (dissent) and O'Malley In a model of court cogency, the opinion cuts to the chase, so as to provide clear guidance. [read post]
17 May 2011, 10:37 pm
In re Huai-Hung Kao et al; In re Harry Ahdieh (CAFC 2010-1307, 2010-1308, 2010-1309) precedential; Judges Radar, Linn (author), Moore 11/680,432 lived to see another day. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 9:00 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com]   Highlights this week included: EPO allowance rate drops - allowance rates at all three trilateral patent offices below 50% (IAM) (BLOG@IP::JUR) (Promote the Progress) (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) USPTO budget shortfall will have long-term effects; Office blames recession, ignoring other likely contributing factors (Patent Baristas) (Promote the Progress) (Peter… [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
But neither of those observations addresses the key question in this case: what, if anything, in the federal Constitution interferes with a state’s control over its subdivisions, which control is ordinarily a matter reserved for state law? [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 1:40 am
Apotex (CAFC 2009-1381, -1424) precedential Judge Linn penned a tidy synopsis of the byzantine route for launching a generic version of a patented drug. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 3:16 pm by Gene Quinn
The Federal Circuit, per Judge Linn (with Chief Judge Rader and Judge Moore also on the panel), ruled that the jury’s verdict on infringement of  the ‘216 patent was supported by substantial evidence, and thus reversed the district court’s grant of JMOL of non-infringement. [read post]
Department of Labor, however, have developed a de minimis rule, whereby employers may disregard insubstantial or insignificant periods of time beyond the scheduled working hours, if, as a practical administrative matter, such time cannot be precisely recorded. [read post]
7 May 2019, 6:10 am by Eric Goldman
This is precisely the type of claim that is prohibited by § 230(c)(1), no matter how artfully pled. [read post]