Search for: "United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit"
Results 4141 - 4160
of 7,493
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jun 2014, 10:34 am
We therefore follow our ordinary practice of remanding so that the Court of Appeals can reconsider, under the proper standard, whether the relevant claims in the ’753 patent are sufficiently definite. [...].Id. at *14 (some internal citations omitted).ConclusionFor the reasons stated, we vacate the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and remand the case for further proceedings… [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 9:40 am
Procedural HistoryIn 2006, respondents sued Limelight in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, claiming patent infringement. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 7:39 am
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 5:21 am
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit 1990)). [read post]
30 May 2014, 9:20 am
” Last fall the Court invited the Solicitor General to file a brief expressing the views of the United States. [read post]
30 May 2014, 8:02 am
In United States v. [read post]
29 May 2014, 8:45 am
Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, Case No. 11-4872. [read post]
28 May 2014, 5:36 am
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit 2010) (quoting U.S. v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 7:49 pm
Procedural HistoryK/S HIMPP (“HIMPP”) appeals from the decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”) in an inter partes reexamination affirming the Central Reexamination Unit (“CRU”) Examiner’s decision not to reject claims 3 and 9 of U.S. [read post]
27 May 2014, 7:45 pm
§ 875(c) requires proof of the defendant's subjective intent to threaten, as required by the Ninth Circuit and the supreme courts of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont; or whether it is enough to show that a “reasonable person” would regard the statement as threatening, as held by other federal courts of appeals and state courts of last resort. [read post]
23 May 2014, 11:44 am
United States, 13-127; Brewington v. [read post]
23 May 2014, 10:05 am
Every year at the end of the United States Supreme Court’s term, the legal press reports on the rise and fall of reversal rates for the federal circuit courts. [read post]
23 May 2014, 9:00 am
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that he should have been allowed to use a whistleblower defense when the TSA undertook to fire him; this week, the Supremes agreed to hear the government’s appeal of that ruling. [read post]
22 May 2014, 5:00 am
Third, the Agency could not be compelled to make its employees available for deposition on grounds of “comity”:[A]lthough comity is an important aspect of the relationship between federal and state courts, the Gizas could muster no authority for a district court's enforcement of a state court subpoena as a matter of comity.Id. [read post]
21 May 2014, 6:54 am
Ford, Eighth Circuit: On remand from the Supreme Court following United States v. [read post]
20 May 2014, 11:04 am
In reaching its conclusion, the Court declined to follow unpublished decisions from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (which includes California) and the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (within the Third Circuit), which had previously held that the notification made pursuant to the TILA automatically voided a security interest. [read post]
19 May 2014, 7:45 pm
§ 875(c) requires proof of the defendant's subjective intent to threaten, as required by the Ninth Circuit and the supreme courts of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont; or whether it is enough to show that a “reasonable person” would regard the statement as threatening, as held by other federal courts of appeals and state courts of last resort. [read post]
19 May 2014, 6:37 am
On April 3, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals set an important precedent regarding successor-employee liability for the U.S. [read post]
16 May 2014, 7:37 am
., a California corporation (collectively "RAP4"), argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit that the trademark infringement suit brought in the Northern District of Indiana by Advanced Tactical Ordnance Systems, LLC, an Indiana corporation ("ATO"), was not properly before the Indiana court, as it lacked personal jurisdiction over RAP4. [read post]
16 May 2014, 7:13 am
This appeal was taken by Optima. [read post]
