Search for: "Doe et al v. Harris et al" Results 221 - 240 of 308
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jul 2009, 7:18 am
Wal-Mart Stores Inc, et al (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) District Court N D Illinois: Inventor/plaintiff’s Managing Director not given highly confidential technical information: McDavid Knee Guard Inc v Nike USA Inc (Chicago Intellectual Property Law Blog) District Court E D Pennsylvania: Warsaw Orthpedic awarded $2M in Globus patent dispute (Patent Docs) District Court E D Texas: ‘I have good cause but it’s a secret’… [read post]
9 Nov 2021, 10:17 am by Dan Harris
 Leung Tak Lun, et al., 944 F.2d 642 (9th Cir. 1991) but advised the United States that its grant of authority for that one deposition should not be regarded as precedent and there has been no subsequent record of China permitting a deposition. [read post]
20 Jun 2018, 11:53 am by Philip Bobbitt
It is, as Chief Justice John Marshall observed of the commerce power in McCulloch v. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 9:41 am
    Back on the terra firma of the Patents Court, Mr Justice Arnold (as he then was) was asked by Teva et al to provide his judgment in light of the CJEU's decision. [read post]
11 Apr 2017, 3:01 pm
(Pix © Larry Catá Backer 2016) I will be teaching a course on Corporate Social Responsibility. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 9:10 pm
Antec et al (CAFC 2009-1248, -1249) precedential Summary Judgment Motion Antec wanted a mulligan on its summary judgment motion. [read post]
28 Oct 2022, 12:30 pm by John Ross
CMP et al. had no First Amendment right to break the laws they broke. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 3:35 am
Bissell Homecare, Inc (not precedential) (TTABlog) TTAB sustains 2(d) opposition, finding SWEDISH LUXERY and SWEDISH SLEEP SYSTEM confusingly similar for mattresses: Tempur-Pedic International Inc., et al. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 3:35 am
Bissell Homecare, Inc (not precedential) (TTABlog) TTAB sustains 2(d) opposition, finding SWEDISH LUXERY and SWEDISH SLEEP SYSTEM confusingly similar for mattresses: Tempur-Pedic International Inc., et al. v. [read post]