Search for: "United States v. Sharp" Results 421 - 440 of 1,453
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Aug 2014, 5:03 pm
§ 1337(a)(3), a complainant must show that an industry in the United States exists with respect to the articles protected by the asserted patent in the form of:(A) significant investment in plant and equipment; (B) significant employment of labor or capital; or (C) substantial investment in its exploitation, including engineering, research and development, or licensing. [read post]
24 Feb 2014, 11:19 am
Merck KGaA v Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp & Others, a Chancery Division, England and Wales, ruling last week from Mr Justice Nugee [don't ask: the Kats haven't come across him either, but he is a Chancery judge], addressed an important preliminary issue. [read post]
10 Nov 2015, 2:00 pm by Rick St. Hilaire
 Because the art market is opaque, diligence is needed to discover an object's true chain of custody, transfer, and ownership.The latest court case demonstrating the need for due diligence is United States v. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 12:20 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITCriminal PracticeImpersonation, Tax Evasion Sentence Upheld; 'Sharp Practice' Not Due Process Violation United States v. [read post]
14 Jun 2007, 5:45 pm
" As reported in this later New York Times article, the United States government has already paid $300,000 to settle the claims of Iqbal's co-plaintiff. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 8:20 am by Ilya Somin
Beginning with the famous case of Bolling v. [read post]
26 Sep 2013, 6:43 pm by Dale Carpenter
  Here are two propositions that United States v. [read post]
21 May 2019, 3:51 am by Edith Roberts
In Merck Sharp & Dohme v. [read post]
17 Sep 2008, 2:33 am
The “narrative” describes Lakhdar Boumediene and the four other Algerians, all of whom were captured in Bosnia, as being either members of the Al-Qaeda terrorist network or being associated with Al-Qaeda “and other suspected terrorists” in activities “against the United States and its allies. [read post]
25 Jul 2017, 1:17 pm by Kenneth Anderson
That reach has included (up until Kiobel II) Chinese corporations and Russian oligarchs, irrespective of any contacts with the United States. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 3:35 am by legaleaseckut
Eden Alexander presents the recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision, United States v. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 3:35 am by legaleaseckut
Eden Alexander presents the recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision, United States v. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 8:49 pm by Florian Mueller
Davila of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted IPCom's December 2021 motion to dismiss an amended complaint by Lenovo and its Motorola Mobility subsidiary that alleged breach of contract, monopolization in violation of U.S. antitrust law (Sherman Act Sec. 2), and sought a declaratory judgment of non-infringement of two IPCom patents. [read post]