Search for: "Becton, Dickinson "
Results 361 - 380
of 446
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jan 2007, 10:00 pm
Becton Dickinson & Co., 214 F.R.D. 157 (S.D.N.Y. 2003); In re Paxil Litigation, 212 F.R.D. 539 (C.D. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 11:16 am
Becton Dickinson.) [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 8:53 am
Becton Dickinson & Co. that a case is final and appealable, and the thirty-day clock begins running, even if questions of attorney’s fees remain to be resolved. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 1:43 pm
Becton Dickinson and Co. may change that. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 12:01 pm
Becton, Dickinson and Company (Fed. [read post]
9 Nov 2010, 10:33 am
Becton Dickinson Vascular Access, Inc., 120 F.3d 1253, 1256 (Fed. [read post]
9 Nov 2010, 11:02 am
Becton Dickinson this morning, Cancer Research Technology v. [read post]
24 Feb 2019, 8:21 am
Becton, Dickinson, & Co. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 6:39 am
Becton, Dickinson & Co., 474 F.3d 1323, 1333 (Fed. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 9:04 pm
That said, I don’t know anyone that cares about this besides me 🙂 Next are few straight forward proposals that essentially codify existing practices: 325(d) Proposals The PTO is considering rules directed at how an analysis under 35 U.S.C. 325(d) is conducted, reflecting many of the principles of Advanced Bionics and Becton Dickinson: Application of 325(d) is limited to situations in which the Office previously addressed prior art or arguments by… [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 8:31 am
Becton, Dickinson & Co. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 4:28 pm
Becton Dickinson & Co., 486 U.S. 196, 202-03 (1988) (“[A] decision on the merits is a ‘final decision’ . . . whether or not there re- mains for adjudication a request for attorney’s fees at- tributable to the case. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 7:21 am
Becton Dickinson Co. (1989), in which the Court held that a judgment leaving unresolved statutory attorney’s fees for work in the litigation is final and appealable. [read post]
10 Sep 2011, 10:27 am
Becton, Dickinson & Co., 2011 WL 2652448, at *8 (Fed. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 2:16 am
TTAB Affirms 2(d) and Specimen Refusals of SONEX for Aircraft EnginesTest Your TTAB Judge-Ability on this Service Mark Specimen of UseMeet the Bloggers I, San Diego, 2005Click on photo for larger pictureCAFC Decisions:Divided CAFC Panel Affirms TTAB's Becton, Dickinson Functionality RulingDouble WYHA? [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 7:49 am
Among the companies that have successfully used the (i)(9) argument to exclude special meeting proposals are: CVS Caremark, Medco, Goldman Sachs, Honeywell, NiSource, Baker Hughes, Becton Dickinson & Co., Eastman Chemical, Safeway, Dow Chemical, Pfizer, Chevron, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Time Warner. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 12:25 pm
Becton, Dickinson and Co., 649 F.3d 1276 (Fed. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 3:04 am
USPTO and Myriad Genetics (Docket Report) (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Inventive Step) (Patently-O) (Holman's Biotech IP Blog) (Patent Docs) (Ladas & Parry) (Tech Transfer Blog) (ipwars.com) (Ars Technica) (BlawgIT) (IP Watch) (The Prior Art) US: Study suggests USPTO erred in broad claims of Myriad BRCA1 patent (Tech Transfer Blog) (Patent Docs) US: CAFC confirms written description requirement in Ariad v Lilly (IP Law Blog) (IP Osgoode) (IP Spotlight) (Ars Technica) US: Justifying… [read post]
20 Oct 2018, 1:00 pm
Major activities in this space include Becton, Dickinson and Company’s acquisition of C.R. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 9:04 pm
That said, I don’t know anyone that cares about this besides me 🙂 Next are few straight forward proposals that essentially codify existing practices: 325(d) Proposals The PTO is considering rules directed at how an analysis under 35 U.S.C. 325(d) is conducted, reflecting many of the principles of Advanced Bionics and Becton Dickinson: Application of 325(d) is limited to situations in which the Office previously addressed prior art or arguments by… [read post]
