Search for: "State v. L. B." Results 4221 - 4240 of 6,570
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Apr 2012, 10:42 am by paperstreet
“[L]aws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas” are not patentable. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 9:28 am by James R. Marsh
Recently this issue has come to a head in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in two cases, In re Amy Unknown, No. 09-41238, and United States v. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 5:55 pm
That one way is spelled out, in very clear words, in Article V of ECUSA's Constitution, and it has not changed in over 200 years. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 10:57 am by Matthew Bush
§ 2254(e)(l) and therefore conflicts with this Court’s holdings that the presumption of correctness afforded state court factual findings cannot be overridden absent clear and convincing contrary evidence.Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (3d Cir.)Petition for certiorariBrief in opposition River Center LLC v. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 5:36 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  Celebrities in ads: federal and state infringement, federal and state dilution, false endorsement, defamation, and right of publicity are all possibilities. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 3:32 am by sally
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) B, R v [2012] EWCA Crim 770 (20 April 2012) High Court (Family Division) L (A Child), Re [2011] EWHC B29 (Fam) (20 December 2011) High Court (Administrative Court) McGrath v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2012] EWHC 1042 (Admin) (20 April 2012) High Court (Commercial Court) Nestor Maritime SA v Sea Anchor Shipping Co Ltd [2012] EWHC 996 (Comm) (20 April 2012) BNP Paribas SA v OJSC… [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 3:23 am by Administrator
L. 102-88, is introduced in the House by Rep. [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 5:01 pm by Oliver
The division held that the subject-matter of claim 1 differed from the device of I2 […] in that it included the (additional and final) feature dealing with the relationship between the light output L and the signal level V. [read post]