Search for: "Unit, Inc., Appeal of" Results 2981 - 3000 of 13,891
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Oct 2019, 11:09 am by John Elwood
Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit has held. [read post]
17 Oct 2019, 3:59 am by Edith Roberts
Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. [read post]
15 Oct 2019, 10:00 pm
Appearing before the Supreme Court were Malcolm Stewart, representing the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and Morgan Chu, representing NantKwest, Inc. [read post]
15 Oct 2019, 12:01 pm by Amy Howe
Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit agreed with Aurelius and the union that the board members were “Officers of the United States” who should have been nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 3:52 am by Edith Roberts
” At Slate (via How Appealing), Adriel I. [read post]
10 Oct 2019, 8:00 am by Guest Blogger
 Internet companies, especially ones that seek broad appeal, thus do not have a clear economic incentive to maintain controversial material. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 1:59 pm by Nathan
  Website owners and web scrapers will want to watch hi’Q Labs’ litigation against LinkedIn Corp. to see if these two characteristics are, in fact, compatible, something placed in doubt by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in HiQ Labs, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 5:20 am by Mark S. Humphreys
United Services Automobile Ass’n and in the 1196, Texarkana Court of Appeals opinion, Southland Lloyd’s Insurance Co. v. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 2:05 am by INFORRM
Background Following the seminal case of Google Inc v Vidal-Hall [2015] EWCA Civ 311, this is the second significant piece of litigation arising from Google’s use of the so-called “Safari Workaround” in 2011-2012. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 9:44 am by Dennis Crouch
Iancu, No. 18-1285 (“Whether MPEP § 1207.04 violates patent applicants’ statutory right of appeal following a second rejection. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 9:30 am by Howard Knopf
I was involved in one of the first landmark Canadian decision, namely BMG Canada Inc. v. [read post]