Search for: "Lay v. USA"
Results 21 - 40
of 301
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jul 2011, 11:23 am
The new case, Williams v. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 8:33 am
Circuit Judge Newman filed a dissention opinion to express her view that the patent described a patent-eligible mechanical and electronic device of defined structure and mechanism (Yu v. [read post]
12 Apr 2021, 7:05 am
” The Federal Circuit also held that the defendants were entitled to sanctions in the form of appellate attorney fees and double costs, against both the complaining individual and his legal counsel (Pirri v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 5:11 am
See Inman v. [read post]
29 Dec 2018, 5:21 pm
The district court rejected the plaintiff’s proposed claim construction and arguments but indicated that the plaintiff’s legal attempts were not so meritless as to render the case exceptional for purposes of the Patent Act’s fee shifting provision (Spineology, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 11:56 pm
In an unpublished opinion, the appellate court affirmed a district court’s finding that the franchisor had a likelihood of success at trial and would be irreparably harmed absent a preliminary injunction barring the franchisee from setting up a competing ice cream parlor (Handel’s Enterprises, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 5:39 am
” The Federal Circuit construed the language consistently with the protocol described in the specification (SIPCO, LLC v. [read post]
11 Jan 2019, 4:21 am
Additionally, the appeals court held that the claims merely recite steps that do not amount to anything more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea of filtering nonconforming data and regenerating a file without it (Glasswall Solutions Ltd. v. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 6:09 am
In addition, the lower court’s judgment was vacated and remanded for a new trial on its compensatory damages award, the jury’s willfulness finding, and the court’s enhanced damages and attorney fees award (Omega Patents, LLC v. [read post]
9 Oct 2020, 4:47 am
The patent owner did not establish that the Board erred in its finding that the challenged claims were obvious in light of the prior art (Siemens Mobility, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Mar 2013, 6:33 am
Costello v. [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 2:41 pm
Applying an agency theory, the panel concluded that Daimler AG had sufficient contacts with the state of California by virtue of the actions of its subsidiary Mercedes Benz USA to give California personal jurisdiction over the German parent , even though Mercedes Benz USA had no involvement with the alleged facts in Argentina. [read post]
7 Sep 2021, 11:07 am
P. 26. [2] Id. at 26(a)(2). [3] Pandrol USA, LP v. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 12:50 am
Finally, the Board did not abuse its discretion by declining to consider an untimely argument made by the petitioner (Henny Penny Corporation v. [read post]
1 Sep 2019, 6:47 am
The Board’s obviousness finding predicated on erroneous claim construction was reversed and the case remanded (MTD Products Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jun 2020, 5:15 am
., Ltd. v. [read post]
29 Aug 2020, 9:49 pm
” These declarations alleged only “possible future injury” and failed to establish a substantial risk of harm (Association for Accessible Medicines v. [read post]
5 Mar 2008, 8:59 am
On March 5, 2008 in USA v Deverso, the Eleventh Circuit did not find any error in the admission of an unsigned foreign birth certificate. [read post]
18 Jun 2023, 9:34 am
Case citation: Enigma Software Group USA, LLC v. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 3:52 am
More from our authors: Vissers Annotated European Patent Convention by Derk Visser, Laurence Lai, Peter de Lange, Kaisa Suominen€ 105 Patent Law Injunctions by Rafal Sikorski€ 181 [read post]