Search for: "V D"
Results 401 - 420
of 76,318
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jun 2018, 9:29 pm
Method of Pulling Pipe Beneath Obstacle Not Directed to Patent Ineligible Abstract Idea By Donald Zuhn -- Last month, in Borehead, LLC v. [read post]
5 Jun 2019, 9:59 pm
By Donald Zuhn -- In April, in Xlear, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2017, 9:59 pm
By Donald Zuhn -- Last week, in Ni-Q, LLC v. [read post]
9 Dec 2015, 9:59 pm
District Court Adopts Magistrate's Conclusion of Invalidity under § 101 and Grants Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Counts By Donald Zuhn -- Last month, in Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2016, 9:21 pm
Magistrate Recommends That Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Be Allowed for Kit Claims and Denied for Method Claims By Donald Zuhn -- Last month, in Oxford Immunotec Ltd. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2017, 9:25 pm
District Court Overrules Defendants' Objections to Magistrate's Report on Lost Profits By Donald Zuhn -- Earlier this month, in GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 9:59 pm
Coupon Patent Easily Found Invalid under § 101 By Joseph Herndon -- On January 12, 2016, the District Court for the District of Delaware issued an opinion in a case captioned Motivation Innovations, LLC v. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 9:34 pm
Noonan -- Judge Richard Andrews, District Court Judge for the District of Delaware rendered a decision on a motion for summary judgment in Immersion Corp. v. [read post]
26 Aug 2018, 9:57 pm
District Court Refuses to Limit Application of In re Cray to Factual Circumstances Where Physical Products Are Involved By Donald Zuhn -- Last month, in VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2010, 3:00 am
The holiday week look back at cases continues with Rajala v. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 4:38 pm
-No a los 15 días en juicio vía sumaria- PRODECON Recomendación al @SATmx por exceder los 40 días para efectuar devoluciones de impuestos. [read post]
30 Aug 2022, 6:00 am
Ct.), aff'd sub nom. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:00 am
State v. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 4:19 pm
V was still hit.Ditto if D spits at V. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 3:09 am
Brüstle v Greenpeace eV (Case C-34/10); [2011] WLR (D) 305 “Any human ovum after fertilisation, any non-fertilised human ovum into which the cell nucleus from a mature human cell had been transplanted, and any non-fertilised human ovum whose division and further development had been stimulated by parthenogenesis constituted a ‘human embryo’ within the meaning of article 6(2)(c) of Parliament and Council Directive 98/44/EC of 6 July 1998 on the legal… [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:47 am
Regina v Seaton [2010] EWCA Crim 1980; [2010] WLR (D) 234 “Where it was suggested at trial that a defendant’s or witness’s account was a recent fabrication, he could not, unless he had waived legal professional privilege, be asked whether he had told his lawyer what he now said was the truth, or whether he was willing to waive the privilege. [read post]
1 Jun 2015, 3:51 am
Mehta has an interesting post about the appeal of Texas v. [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 2:12 am
Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families v Fletcher; Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (No 2); [2011] UKSC 36 [2011] WLR (D) 247 “Teachers who had been employed by the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families and seconded to work at European Schools throughout the European Union were entitled to bring unfair dismissal claims before an employment tribunal under section 94(1) of the… [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 10:15 pm
Les échéanciers de Legifrance Quand il veut vérifier rapidement si un décret d'application de tel article d'une réforme législative a bien été pris, le juriste, s'il a été bien formé , aura tendance à utiliser l'échéancier des décrets (...) [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 3:33 am
Regina (McGetrick) v Parole Board and another [2012] EWHC 882 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 114 “When considering and making its substantive recommendation on the question of the early release or recall of prisoners on licence following a reference to it by the Secretary of State for Justice, the Parole Board was ‘dealing with the case’ within the meaning of section 239(3) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and was therefore required to consider all the documents given to… [read post]
