Search for: "State v. Baxter"
Results 401 - 420
of 517
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Sep 2009, 5:51 am
(IPKat) United States US General Third IP cross-retaliation strike against USA at WTO (Excess Copyright) World Economic Forum survey: US 18th in global IP protection (Intellectual Property Watch) Funds for US State Department global IP enforcement training (Intellectual Property Watch) Changes in USPTO senior management (Patent Docs) US Patents PatentFreedom to offer subscription-based reexam service to attack NPE patents (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog)… [read post]
10 Sep 2009, 3:03 pm
Baxter Int'l, Inc. [read post]
4 Sep 2009, 4:37 am
Baxter, No. 98 Civ. 4314 (SJF) (ASC), 2005 U.S. [read post]
3 Sep 2009, 6:44 pm
See Baxter International, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 9:43 am
Arguments in Baxter v. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 4:10 am
"In Martinez v Safir, App. [read post]
4 Aug 2009, 3:58 pm
Recovery of such damages is precluded by Baxter v. [read post]
21 Jul 2009, 7:16 am
Trinitas may not attract the nineteen amicus briefs that Baxter v. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 7:25 am
Under the 1983 Underwater Devices Inc. v. [read post]
7 Jul 2009, 1:00 am
Baxter D. [read post]
7 Jul 2009, 12:40 am
Justice Marvin Baxter, writing for the 6-1 court, ruled that enhancements are permissible "where the juvenile proceedings included all the constitutional protections applicable to such matters, even though these protections do not include the right to jury trial. [read post]
4 Jul 2009, 5:50 pm
Retailer Name Street Address City State 1 Yoss Thriftway Old 71 Highway P.O. [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 5:07 am
United States, No. 1:04-cr-00371 (N.D. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 7:01 am
We posted earlier this month about Joseph v. [read post]
10 Jun 2009, 10:00 pm
The first question was whether the issue was one of substantive state law (the state of Florida), or a procedural matter under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [read post]
1 Jun 2009, 5:00 am
The plaintiffs and their treaters are often from the same state, which means there's no diversity of citizenship and no opportunity for the out-of-state drug company to remove the case to federal court.Any case that helps drug companies avoid that result is worth a minute's thought.Joseph v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 1:42 pm
The California Supreme Court ruled today in Strauss v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 10:53 am
In Strauss v. [read post]
19 May 2009, 9:29 am
Justice Baxters says this appeal "may not be the last," but I can add to that: It definitely won't be the last.It's a death penalty case. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:30 pm
See GunBroker.com LLC v. [read post]
