Search for: "PRECISION STANDARD V US"
Results 3141 - 3160
of 4,554
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Feb 2013, 12:30 pm
It was not until after he was confirmed by the Senate that he issued his most important opinions of his first Term, defining obscenity standards in Roth v. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 5:06 am
Ackerman v. [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 11:53 am
They are used in two respects. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 3:54 am
The UK provisions (SI 2009/859) require a standard 12 month period. [read post]
15 Sep 2016, 11:16 am
Connecticut to protect a fundamental right to use contraception free from governmental prohibition. [read post]
2 May 2023, 7:48 am
ExeGi Pharma, LLC v. [read post]
4 Apr 2010, 1:39 pm
" "[A] patentee need not define his invention with mathematical precision in order to comply with the definiteness requirement. [read post]
18 Sep 2015, 4:54 pm
Real Estate Group v. [read post]
10 Sep 2016, 11:14 am
Aesthetic packages are preferred over standardized packages. [read post]
14 Nov 2013, 7:41 am
Levine, 555 U.S. 555 (2009), and PLIVA v. [read post]
27 Feb 2010, 4:59 pm
Therefore, when the specification uses a single embodiment to enable the claims, courts should not limit the broader claim language to that embodiment "unless the patentee has demonstrated a clear intention to limit the claim scope using 'words or expressions of manifest execution or restriction.'" Liebel-Flarsheim Co. v. [read post]
1 Jan 2007, 8:31 pm
For example, the oft-heard conservative critique that judges who hand down decisions like Lawrence v. [read post]
4 Apr 2021, 10:49 am
The use of "alongside" maliciously conveyed the image that Marc worked in close physical proximity to other members of the EPIC staff. [read post]
18 Feb 2022, 6:02 am
"] From Wednesday's decision in Vickery v. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 8:42 am
v. [read post]
4 Jun 2011, 11:12 am
Sega v. [read post]
3 Jul 2024, 6:30 am
The question of enforcement is highly pertinent today considering Supreme Court decisions creating the relatively new “congruence and proportionality” standard, along with concerns about voting rights in the wake of the invalidation of a key section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in Shelby County v. [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 8:58 pm
More recently, Gregory Shill of the University of Iowa College of Law describes in The Atlantic how the law effectively compels the use of the automobile, repeating the 1977 SCOTUS reference in Wooley v. [read post]
15 Aug 2007, 4:41 pm
In a case styled Enmund v. [read post]
