Search for: "Matter of CL" Results 281 - 300 of 1,421
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2012, 10:01 am by Lisa Larrimore Ouellette
(Which is not to say that Lemley's solution is right as a policy matter—as I said before, I would want to see some discussion of how it would apply in actual cases, which is currently lacking from Lemley's draft.)Stay tuned: as amicus briefs for CLS Bank come in and as scholars debate these ideas at Santa Clara's conference in November, I'm sure there will be much more commentary on software patents in the coming months! [read post]
16 Dec 2023, 3:20 pm by Steve Bainbridge
Very interesting results reported by Christopher Poliquin and Young Hou at CLS Blue Sky Blog. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 12:54 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The authors’ March 12, 2024, column in the CLS Blue Sky Blog about their paper can be found here. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 7:08 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
  Before the court are defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to plaintiffs’ breach of fiduciary claim (Count I), defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction plaintiffs’ alternate breach of fiduciary duty claim (Count II), and defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim plaintiffs’ legislative takings claim (Count III). [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 7:06 am by Sandra Park
Myriad Genetics, and filed an amicus brief on behalf of the ACLU in support of CLS Bank. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 10:48 am by Ezra Rosser
Bridges, Excavating Race-Based Disadvantage Among Class-Privileged People of Color, Harvard Civil Rights – Civil Liberties Law Review (CR-CL), 2018 (forthcoming), Boston Univ. [read post]
14 Jun 2017, 9:06 pm by Charles Bieneman
CLS Bank Int’l., although the court did state that the defendant’s motion could be renewed after claim construction and discovery. [read post]
21 Sep 2007, 6:49 am
Cl. 1976) (noting that secondary considerations must be "attributable to the combination of the . . . claims" to be worthy of consideration)Thus, it may be that these claims are unpatentable as obvious under § 103. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 12:48 pm by Dennis Crouch
Patent Nos. 6,172,679 and 6,618,047); CLS Bank Int'l. v. [read post]
16 May 2013, 7:14 am by Gene Quinn
Did the Federal Circuit Ignore the Supreme Court in CLS Bank? [read post]