Search for: "In re Grant" Results 2461 - 2480 of 33,747
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Oct 2022, 7:06 am by SCOTUStalk
 Please tell us your first name and where you’re calling from. [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 7:43 am
(DocketDB) In re Lester Collins, M.D., No. 07-0737 (O’Neill, J.) [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 6:30 am by Matthew Gilpin
Wyeth Inc. and In re Lamictal Direct Purchaser Antitrust LitigationThe settlement agreements challenged in Professional Drug Co. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2016, 7:09 am by Gritsforbreakfast
"You're trying to get these cases dismissed and that's not justice. [read post]
11 Jul 2009, 1:06 am
This money would have to re-paid by 2014, and the USPTO is authorized to establish a surcharge to re-pay the funds.At PatentHawk, there is text:Mismanagement at the USPTO gets a thumbs up from Congress. [read post]
28 Jul 2009, 3:35 pm
Daniel Grant has the latest in the Maine Antique Digest. [read post]
7 Aug 2007, 12:59 pm
A  prosecutor explains his view of investigation: "We're not perfect all the time, but, wow, why not have defendants send us money to clear them? [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 6:47 am by David Markus
“Once you’re in, the statistics say, you have a two-thirds chance of winning. [read post]
27 May 2016, 8:18 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Pro se litigants sometimes read this blog, so if you're a pro se litigant who wants to take an appeal to the Court of Appeals, this one's for you.The case is Elliott v. [read post]
19 Apr 2022, 11:07 am
They’re also geared toward making sure new transportation infrastructure is designed with safety in mind. [read post]
14 Aug 2016, 8:49 pm by The Dear Rich Staff
As a permissions editor, you're probably already aware of most of the important issues but we'll cover some of the basics just in case. [read post]
2 Jun 2013, 6:05 am by Gene Quinn
"You’re going to get a claim construction early from the PTAB. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 4:28 pm by Madhulika Vishwanathan
 The prior arts which were considered in the previous post grant opposition were re-evaluated in light of the recommendations of the opposition board. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 3:37 pm by John C. Manoog III
With regard to the testimony of the defendant’s witness, the court found that there was nothing irregular about his testimony and that the plaintiff had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness and even re-cross-examine him. [read post]