Search for: "Doe v. Holder" Results 561 - 580 of 6,694
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Mar 2011, 12:02 pm by Lyle Denniston
Holder (Attorney General), et al. (10-545). [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 6:50 pm by David Post
For this proposition, the court relied on Supreme Court’s opinion in Eldred v. [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 6:50 pm by David Post
For this proposition, the court relied on Supreme Court’s opinion in Eldred v. [read post]
22 Mar 2013, 3:02 pm by Bruce Boyden
The problem is that 512(c)(1)(B) does essentially mirror the test for vicarious infringement. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 2:39 pm by Harold O'Grady
The decision in Svensson and Others v Retriever Sverige AB arises out of a case from Sweden’s Court of Appeal that is of interest to Internet users as it deals with the mechanism holding the web together. [read post]
Conclusion The case is another indicator that the UK Supreme Court decision in Unwired Planet v Huawei – which gave the green light for UK courts to formulate global royalty rates for essential technologies – has created a perception that the UK is a welcoming jurisdiction for enforcement of the rights of SEP holders. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Holder that essentially gutted the so-called “preclearance” requirements under the Voting Rights Act (VRA). [read post]
24 Oct 2018, 2:13 am by Brian Cordery
The Court of Appeal has taken a pragmatic view, noting that the negotiation framework set out by the European Court of Justice in Huawei v ZTE provides a ‘safe harbour’ for SEP owners but does not set out mandatory conditions for negotiations. [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 4:22 am by Dennis Crouch
Had the Board decided in Kingston’s favor, the patent holder (SPEX) could have appealed under Wi-Fi One. [read post]