Search for: "Jason Rantanen"
Results 381 - 400
of 439
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Apr 2011, 3:26 pm
By Jason Rantanen In re violation of Rule 28(D) (Fed. [read post]
6 Apr 2011, 8:13 am
By Jason Rantanen On Monday, the Senate confirmed the nomination of Jimmie V. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 10:04 pm
By Jason Rantanen In re Verizon Business Network Services Inc. [read post]
27 Mar 2011, 10:07 pm
By Jason Rantanen Aventis Pharma S.A. v. [read post]
24 Mar 2011, 9:22 pm
By Jason Rantanen American Piledriving Equipment, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 5:26 pm
The following is excerpted from a March 21, 2011 post by Jason Rantanen at Patently-O: For the second time this year the Federal Circuit has issued a precedential decision reversing an award of attorneys' fees entered against a patentee. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 11:16 pm
By Jason Rantanen Old Reliable Wholesale, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 7:56 am
Jason Rantanen's Patently-O post cited by District Court In Arlington Industries, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 5:28 pm
I am very happy to announce that my fellow Patently-O author, Jason Rantanen, has accepted a tenure track position as an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Iowa College of Law. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 11:52 am
By Jason Rantanen ABB Inc. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 1:23 pm
By Jason Rantanen A few weeks ago a commenter asked about a list of Federal Circuit en banc patent law decisions. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 12:15 pm
Jason Rantanen has written several recent posts on the Federal Circuit's Rule 36 affirmances. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 12:36 pm
By Jason Rantanen Cancer Research Technology Ltd. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 5:37 pm
By Oskar LiivakAssistant Professor, Cornell Law School As Jason Rantanen’s post describes, Centocor claimed but failed to disclose any fully humanized antibodies. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 10:14 pm
By Jason Rantanen Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 9:35 pm
By Jason Rantanen Last week I posted data about the CAFC's use of Rule 36 summary orders for the past several years, and suggested that there appears to be a notable uptick in the court's use of Rule 36 for patent infringement appeals this year. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 3:58 pm
By Jason Rantanen Tomorrow, February 23rd, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Global-Tech v. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 3:34 pm
By Jason Rantanen In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation (Fed. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 4:00 am
By Jason Rantanen In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation (Fed. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 4:46 pm
By Jason Rantanen As discussed yesterday, the Federal Circuit disposed of approximately 19% of the patent infringement appeals it adjudicated in FY 2010 via Rule 36 summary orders/affirmances. [read post]
