Search for: "Members of the U.S. Ct. of Appeals for the Federal Cir."
Results 21 - 40
of 367
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
Seventh Circuit Approves Both “Untimely” Interlocutory Appeal and Issue-Specific Class Certification
14 Mar 2012, 3:00 am
Ct. 2541 (2011), might have had on cases of huge numbers of potential class members. [read post]
24 Feb 2019, 8:21 am
Ct. 1059 (2013). [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 6:30 am
On October 15, 2012, U.S. [read post]
4 Aug 2013, 6:43 am
LEXIS 105897 (D CO, July 29, 2013), a Colorado federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2013 U.S. [read post]
9 Jun 2020, 7:37 pm
Ct. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 9:54 am
Jan 03, 2012), appeal pending, No. 120600031 (5th Cir. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 6:20 am
Ed. 2d 668 (1987); Craig v Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 193, 97 S Ct 451, 50 L. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 2:58 am
Ct. [read post]
24 Nov 2021, 11:20 am
Cir. 2021), the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals addressed challenges to the constitutionality of the structure of the Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 9:35 am
The Seventh Circuit has issued the first opinion of a federal court of appeals addressing, under Spokeo, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 9:35 am
The Seventh Circuit has issued the first opinion of a federal court of appeals addressing, under Spokeo, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Nov 2022, 12:38 pm
Ct. 2190 (2021). [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 5:38 pm
Ct. at 1549. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 3:17 pm
Cir. 2000). [read post]
19 Jan 2021, 2:32 pm
Riley, 920 F.3d 200, 207 (4th Cir. 2019). [read post]
23 Aug 2022, 7:36 am
Ct. 2190 (2021): “Every class member must have Article III standing in order to recover individual damages. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 12:09 pm
Cir. 2020), began when Cheetah sued AT&T for infringing its U.S. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 8:33 am
Ct. 1072); Moran Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2020, 8:39 am
Ct. 1853 (2018). [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 10:49 am
Cir. 2012) In yet another case, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has identified the wide chasm separating members of the court on issues involving patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
