Search for: "No. 337" Results 3921 - 3940 of 4,429
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Jan 2013, 10:32 pm by Florian Mueller
Last week I wrote about the "defensive use" provision in the proposed FTC-Google patent antitrust deal having been identified as the primary area of concern. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
The Board is of the opinion that it follows from this principle of legal security that claims are to be considered as lacking clarity within the meaning of A 84 if they do not allow to draw that distinction (see T 337/95 [2.2-5]). [read post]
4 Apr 2023, 2:30 am by Florian Mueller
The relevant statute says this (just skip it if you're not interested or already know it): "The petitioner in an inter partes review of a claim in a patent under this chapter that results in a final written decision under section 318(a), or the real party in interest or privy of the petitioner, may not assert either in a civil action arising in whole or in part under section 1338 of title 28 or in a proceeding before the International Trade Commission under section 337 of the… [read post]
2 Apr 2024, 4:50 am by Annsley Merelle Ward
Interdigital had sought $337 million, while Lenovo offered $80 million. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 9:10 am by Eric P. Robinson
Pietsch, 98 Idaho 337, 583 P.2d 395 (1977), a lawyer prosecuted for contempt of court stemming from a probate matter was held by the Supreme Court of Idaho to be a public figure in a subsequent libel suit over coverage  because of the prominence of that prosecution. [read post]
14 May 2018, 11:30 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Justia lists 7,050 Law Blogs now on line in 74 subcategories*  Click on the text highlighted in blue to access the  Administrative Law Blog listed. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 9:10 am by Eric P. Robinson
Pietsch, 98 Idaho 337, 583 P.2d 395 (1977), a lawyer prosecuted for contempt of court stemming from a probate matter was held by the Supreme Court of Idaho to be a public figure in a subsequent libel suit over coverage  because of the prominence of that prosecution. [read post]
3 Nov 2020, 5:22 am by gA
La magna asamblea constituyente aclaró que “no puede haber municipio autónomo verdadero si no le reconocemos explícitamente entidad política o le retaceamos la capacidad de organizar su administración y realizar los actos administrativos necesarios para el cumplimiento de sus funciones o lo privamos del sustento económico-financiero indispensable para que preste aquellos servicios públicos que la provincia le asigne, inherentes a su existencia o… [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 2:43 pm
After he was “arrested for possession of child pornography” in violation of federal law, Brian Boyer filed a civil lawsuit against his sister, Debora Mohring, and his Parole Officer, Byron Rice. . . . [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 12:44 pm by Robin E. Kobayashi
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 89, No. 3 March 2024 A Report of En Banc and Significant Panel Decisions of the WCAB and Selected Court Opinions of Related Interest, With a Digest of WCAB Decisions Denied Judicial Review © Copyright 2024 LexisNexis. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 5:07 am
Snow, 337 Or. 219, 94 P.3d 872 (Oregon Supreme Court 2004). [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 9:10 am by Eric P. Robinson
Pietsch, 98 Idaho 337, 583 P.2d 395 (1977), a lawyer prosecuted for contempt of court stemming from a probate matter was held by the Supreme Court of Idaho to be a public figure in a subsequent libel suit over coverage  because of the prominence of that prosecution. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 9:10 am by Eric P. Robinson
Pietsch, 98 Idaho 337, 583 P.2d 395 (1977), a lawyer prosecuted for contempt of court stemming from a probate matter was held by the Supreme Court of Idaho to be a public figure in a subsequent libel suit over coverage  because of the prominence of that prosecution. [read post]
6 Sep 2018, 1:43 pm
S. 294, 336– 337 (1962) (pointing out that “the definition of the relevant market” must “‘correspond to the commercial realities’ of the industry”). [read post]
5 Sep 2018, 1:39 pm
S. 294, 336– 337 (1962) (pointing out that “the definition of the relevant market” must “‘correspond to the commercial realities’ of the industry”). [read post]