Search for: "No. 337" Results 3461 - 3480 of 4,432
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 May 2010, 7:16 pm by Eric Schweibenz
No. 337-TA-692) granting in part Respondents motion to compel Complainants to respond to interrogatory nos. 5 and 54 and request for production nos. 1, 13, 27, 53, 79, 105, 132-157 and 159-161. [read post]
3 May 2010, 3:01 am
(Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Inventive Step) CAFC to hear inequitable conduct case en banc: Theresense, Inc v Becton Dickinson and Co (Inventive Step) (Patently-O) (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Filewrapper) (Patent Docs) District Court E D Texas holds ResQNet does not require admission of license agreements arising out of litigation: Fenner v HP (EDTexweblog.com) (Docket Report) District Court S D Texas: False marking fine set at point above gross revenue: Forest Group v Bon Tool… [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 11:56 pm
(IP tango)   Netherlands BREIN wants Dutch ISP to block The Pirate Bay (TorrentFreak)   New Zealand Kiwi 3 strikes anti-piracy bill receives unanimous support (TorrentFreak)   Poland Infringement of personal rights and company name in domain name – all in one case (Class 46)   Sweden Hollywood: It’s time for court to impose Pirate Bay fines (TorrentFreak) Why a calendar company wants to take over The Pirate Bay (Ars Technica) Movie studios threaten strike on Pirate… [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 11:17 am by Anna Christensen
So far, the Court has decided 33 of its argued cases this Term, including (as of yesterday) all cases argued during the October Sitting. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 1:18 pm by Sheppard Mullin
., 393 U.S. 333, 337 (1969)), it noted that there is nothing inherently improper about competitors communicating with each other or exchanging pricing information, unless such an exchange would indicate the existence of an agreement to fix or stabilize prices. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 6:25 am by Eric Schweibenz
No. 337-TA-692) providing guidance regarding the appropriate contact for the parties if they should have questions or concerns over the status of a pending motion or order. [read post]