Search for: "HARRIS V. STATE, ET AL."
Results 301 - 320
of 479
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Aug 2011, 11:24 pm
Hitachi et al (EDTexweblog.com) CAFC sets new test for ‘inequitable’ patent prosecution: Therasense v Becton, Dickinson & Co (JIPLP) CAFC validity determination undone by appellant via patent reexamination? [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 8:02 am
Path. et al. v. [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 8:02 am
Path. et al. v. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 11:40 am
Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 11:13 pm
USA Products Group Inc., et. al. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 7:54 am
Harry M. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 8:41 am
Brief in opposition of Edmund Brown et al. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 10:12 am
Harris, 10-520, for Kurns v. [read post]
25 May 2011, 11:46 pm
United States, 429 U.S. 17 (1976), and Precision Instruments Manufacturing Co. v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 10:37 pm
WO 01/08661 to Maloney ("Maloney"), both alone and in combination with United States Patent No. 5,047,248 to Calanchi et al. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 9:34 am
Astra USA, Inc. et al. v. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 5:10 am
National Bank of Daingerfield, et al. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 1:32 pm
Excess Underwriters at Lloyd's, London et al vs Frank's Casing, 246 S.W. 42 (Tex. 2008). [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 3:42 am
The Walt Disney Company, et. al. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 11:20 am
[et al.] [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 5:33 am
State of California, et al., U.S. [read post]
19 Feb 2011, 3:32 pm
The subsequent case of Harris Corp. v. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 9:12 pm
Easton Enterprises et al (CAFC 2010-1057, -1116) precedential Tokai didn't get evidence in because of procedural error: failure to submit written reports for its experts, Jones and Sung. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 2:40 pm
"[18] The Goslin court not only reversed the trial court, but it instructed the trial court to allow the petitioner to amend her petition since the record was absent of any representation regarding her residence at the time of filing.[19] Also on point is federal case law from within our State.[20] In Davis v Davis, 638 F Supp 862 (ND Ill 1986), the petitioner had not been a resident of Illinois for 90 days preceding the filing of her petition. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 1:04 pm
[et al.]. [read post]
