Search for: "REITER v. STATE"
Results 541 - 560
of 4,511
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Sep 2013, 7:38 am
The Federal Circuit reiterated that “the obviousness of a design patent must . . . be assessed from the viewpoint of an ordinary designer,” notwithstanding some unfortunate dicta (my characterization, not the court’s) in the 2009 case of Seaway Trading Corp. v. [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 12:30 pm
Hot on the heels of United States v. [read post]
16 Oct 2008, 3:27 pm
In a recent holding, the Third Circuit reiterated Pennsylvania’s “at-will” presumption in employment by declining to expand the recognized exceptions to that principle. [read post]
28 Dec 2007, 3:11 pm
United States v. [read post]
27 Jan 2010, 6:59 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 8:53 pm
United States v. [read post]
21 May 2024, 2:45 am
In 10x Genomics v Curio (UPC_CFI_463/2023), the Düsseldorf Local Division reiterated its position in Ortovox v Mammut (UPC_CFI_452/2023) that statements made by the patentee in the patent granting procedure are not, by law, admissible material for interpretation and are generally not be taken into account in the context of patent interpretation. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 6:44 am
Just as Loving v. [read post]
15 May 2018, 12:49 pm
Here is how Justice Ginsburg concluded her majority opinion in McCoy v. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 8:24 am
In United States v. [read post]
22 Apr 2020, 5:00 am
In United States v. [read post]
12 Feb 2009, 6:07 am
State v. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 11:51 pm
Schroeder v. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 4:55 pm
Clinton v. [read post]
24 Jan 2024, 10:14 am
This reiterates how those laws put employers in the impossible position of making the ownership determination without any guidance from the courts. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:11 am
The Justices ask about the wording of the 2011 AV Referendum Act and Chambers QC confirms that he will provide the relevant provision which shows the different wording used, which confirms that Parliament is handing over its sovereignty (in contrast to that used in the 2015 Act). 14:17: Dominic Chambers QC reiterates that the 2015 Act contained no requirement for the UK government to implement the result or set a timeline in relation to the referendum. [read post]
10 Dec 2017, 2:54 am
In Kunitsyna v. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 11:50 am
Seuss Enterprises, LP v. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 7:08 am
United States v. [read post]
12 Jan 2009, 5:08 am
In Harbison v. [read post]
