Search for: "State v. Jacobs"
Results 301 - 320
of 1,841
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 May 2011, 10:04 am
United States v. [read post]
26 Oct 2008, 3:49 pm
United States v. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 6:20 pm
United States v. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 11:06 am
This morning the Court of Appeal (Jacob and Sedley LJJ and Norris J) handed down its judgment in Nokia v IPCom [2011] EWCA Civ 6.By way of back story: IPCom (described in the judgment as a “non practising entity”, i.e. a patentee with no business of its own in products covered by the patents), owned a number of patents (which it had bought from Bosch) in the field of mobile communications technology. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 2:56 pm
United States v. [read post]
19 Oct 2008, 11:26 am
United States v. [read post]
9 Oct 2012, 9:00 pm
In Jacobs v. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:28 am
Jacobs does the same for Greenwire. [read post]
13 Jun 2023, 7:55 am
Yesterday, the UCLA Environmental Law Clinic filed a brief in the California Restaurant Association v. [read post]
22 Aug 2018, 3:30 am
I want to give a bit tip of my hat to Jacob Sitman who flagged the PHRC guidance for me. [read post]
21 Mar 2014, 9:47 am
On February 11th, the three private plaintiff-appellants and eleven State plaintiff-appellants in State National Bank of Big Spring, et al. v. [read post]
7 Jul 2014, 7:49 pm
In Duran v. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 7:52 am
The Kat brings news of the decision of the Court of Appeal (Sir Robin Jacob providing a judgment with which Ward and Patten LJJ agreed) in the latest round of the Schütz v Werit dispute ([2011] EWCA Civ 927) – this time on the interpretation of s68 PA 1977. [read post]
10 May 2018, 3:58 am
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31] that public employees cannot be required to pay union dues. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 7:04 am
In a key part of the judgment's reasoning (at least in the IPKat's opinion), Jacob LJ stated: "I think the flaw in [assuming that the skilled person is the same in each case] is to assume that “the art” is necessarily the same both before and after the invention is made. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 9:33 am
If, however, there is some doubt about whether the actual form of compound claimed would result from the described process, it needs to be determined whether following the process would inevitably arrive at the claimed compound.This was the situation in Leo Pharma v Sandoz EWCA Civ 1188, which was decided by Lords Justice Jacob and Patten yesterday (17 November), on appeal from Floyd J's decision in the High Court earlier this year ([2009] EWHC 996 (Pat)). [read post]
30 Oct 2024, 5:01 am
Edwards v. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 10:00 am
***In the Waymo v. [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 1:01 am
In Fletcher v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 3:02 pm
Arguing on behalf of the state, Michigan Solicitor General Eric Restuccia began by emphasizing the Court’s decision in North Carolina v. [read post]
