Search for: "PRECISION STANDARD V US"
Results 3561 - 3580
of 4,555
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2011, 2:20 pm
They also address refusals to license, patent pools, innovation markets, standard setting organizations, and pharmaceutical patent settlements. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:24 am
The Court of Appeals also noted that the United States Supreme Court stated a “basic teaching of representative government … that elected officials represent all of those who elect them, and not merely those who are their neighbors," citing Dusch (387 US 112, Dallas County, Alabama v Reese (421 US 477) and Fortson v Dorsey, 379 US 433. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 9:04 am
(Gentry v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 5:03 pm
The prior art teaches oral creatine supplementation using creatine monohydrate. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 12:14 pm
United States v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 12:38 pm
The en banc decision of the Court of Military Commission Review (“CMCR”) in United States v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 7:27 am
Even though the standards of the law are borrowed largely from similar laws related to the distribution of sexually themed materials to minors (see Ginsberg v. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 12:27 pm
Noting that the Chevron standard applies with full force in the tax context, the Court refused to apply the additional factors, such as how long the regulation has been in effect, used in National Muffler Dealers Assn., Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 8:56 am
One needn't expect more, I suppose, but it's not exactly high-order journalism -- more a skillful use of the ctrl-V function. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 8:36 pm
Court of Military Commission Review (CMCR) held in U.S. v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 11:56 am
Smith won in State v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 5:45 pm
(The AmeriKat may just be tired, but the whole concept of rebuttable presumptions and standards of proofs in relation to objecting to registered IP rights, a la i4i v Microsoft, seem to be coming through in this debate). [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 3:36 pm
Hermitage School District and J.S. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 7:32 am
Ward v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 6:12 am
Finally the court turned to the application of NBA v Motorola. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 2:30 am
Kenny J accepted that they were not precise, but found they applied Nesbit Evans Group Australia Pty Ltd v Impro Ltd (1997) 39 IPR 56 at 95 to find they provided a workable standard. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 9:45 am
Last week the IPKat reported on the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-462/09 Thuiskopie v Opus. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 6:29 am
" Id. at *5, quoting Wright v. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 8:22 am
Counsel for the plaintiffs in BP v. [read post]
16 Jun 2011, 12:58 pm
Well, precisely that has come to pass. [read post]
