Search for: "USA v. Tri-State Group"
Results 221 - 240
of 242
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2008, 2:00 pm
Oliveira Ardor New York Senior Broker Associate 2 Gina Berger Lower East End Realty Brokerage - Commercial / Investment Sales 2 Ariel Toledano ant propeties inc Brokerage - Residential 3 Michael Xylas Xylas & Ziccardi, LLP Real Estate Attorney 3 Tracy Mehlman Marcus and Millichap Brokerage - Residential 3 David Hale 50 State Building Advisors Executive Vice President 3 Venecia DeSilva upscalecorp@yahoo.com investor 2 John Choi … [read post]
25 Jul 2008, 10:51 am
In Philip Morris USA v. [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 8:34 am
: (Patent Circle), Tanzania to conduct study on impact of counterfeit medicines: (Afro-IP), US: New rules on generic biological medicines under US Congressional debate: (Intellectual Property Watch), Pharma & Biotech - Products Acular (Ketorolac) – US: CAFC rules against Apotex reverse doctrine of equivalents: Roche Palo Alto & Allergan, Inc v Apotex: (Patent Circle), Carbatrol (Carbamazapine) – US: Federal judge allows Corepharma to seek DJ that its… [read post]
10 Jul 2008, 4:16 am
" (Gregg v. [read post]
9 Jul 2008, 10:03 pm
That policy forms a significant legal foundation for the now-pending Supreme Court appeal by a leading company, Philip Morris USA Inc., and its parent, Altria Group. [read post]
5 Jul 2008, 11:05 am
interview: (IP tango) Events 7 July: PLI briefing webcast ‘Life after Quanta v LGE: What every patent lawyer needs to know’: (PLI), 7-15 July/16-18 July: 2nd Transatlantic IP summer academy, modules one and two – Alicante/Milan: (IPKat), 9 July 2008: ALI & ABA webcast ‘Quanta v LG: What you should know’: (Patent Docs), 11 July: CIPA moot to improve participants’ understanding of procedures of EPO Technical… [read post]
11 Apr 2008, 9:00 am
No problem…: Lundbeck A/S v Generics UK Ltd & Ors: (IPKat), Exelon (Rivastigmine Tartrate) – Dr Reddy’s and Novartis settle Exelon patent dispute: (Therapeutics Daily), GeneMaker – Codon Devices, Blue Heron Biotechnology settle patent suit over gene synthesis platform: (Patent Docs), Glucophage (Metformin) – Depomed settles patent litigation against IVAX: (SmartBrief), (IP Law360), (GenericsWeb), Lexapro… [read post]
23 Mar 2008, 9:03 am
OpinionShort Title/District 08a0149n.062008/03/17 USA v. [read post]
11 Mar 2008, 1:00 am
Might sound silly to you, but I thought Zach was a good blogger, I had respect for him because of it and I still do.So in reading Zach Scruggs' reply brief yesterday in USA v. [read post]
24 Jan 2008, 12:54 am
-- I'm sure I must have linked to this sometime over the last week, but just in case I didn't, here's the new scheduling order in USA v. [read post]
18 Dec 2007, 7:42 am
Phone: (509) 624-3323, (509) 468-9443 E-mail: SpokaneAC@aol.com Brain Injury Brain Injury Association of WA 16365 N.E. 87th Street, Suite B-4 Redmond, WA 98052 Phone: (425) 895-0047; (800) 523-5438 (Toll Free in WA) E-mail: biawa@biawa.org Web: http://www.biawa.org Wanda Godin Head Injury Support Group St. [read post]
1 Dec 2007, 8:51 am
The PACER records of USA v. [read post]
16 Oct 2007, 1:33 am
" You remember how the Scruggs Katrina Group has frequently pointed out that a State Farm claims supervisor asserted the Fifth when she was deposed? [read post]
14 Sep 2007, 10:42 am
, USA Today, Dec. 6, 2001, available at [www.usatoday.com].[22] Fed. [read post]
13 Sep 2007, 10:48 am
Disparate reactions to mass marketing defeat the commonality of this element of consumer fraud:[A]vailable information makes it plain that [the class includes] a diverse group of entities. [read post]
27 Feb 2007, 6:02 am
Upon additional reflection, it seems likely that the recent Supreme Court decision concerning the constitutional pitfalls of punitive damages awards, Philip Morris USA v. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 9:47 pm
Philip Morris USA v. [read post]
1 Feb 2007, 6:07 am
Liggett Group, Inc., 683 F. [read post]
27 Jan 2007, 9:01 pm
Moseley v. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 4:02 pm
Defendants have included people who have never even used a computer, and many people who although they have used a computer, have never engaged in any peer to peer file sharing.Sometimes the cases are misleadingly referred to as cases against 'downloaders'; in fact the RIAA knows nothing of any downloading when it commences suit, and in many instances no downloading ever took place.It is more accurate to refer to the cases as cases against persons who paid for internet access which the… [read post]
