Search for: "John Does 1, 2, 3"
Results 5921 - 5940
of 7,891
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Feb 2011, 9:49 am
The end result:We hold that claims 2, 3, 14, and 15 of the ’775 patent are invalid for lack of written description. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 5:05 am
CIV. 2:11-397 WBS JFM. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 2:08 pm
These are: 1. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 1:04 pm
John Rockefeller (D-WV), and is co-sponsored by Sens. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 12:42 pm
I’ve blogged about that subject many times, but John does a nice job of synthesizing the truths about referrals. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 4:35 am
To be eligible to file short-form registration statements on Form S-3 or Form F-3, a company must meet (1) registrant requirements (for example, a company must have been a reporting company for at least a year and be timely in meeting these reporting requirements), and (2) at least one of several alternate transaction requirements. [read post]
17 Feb 2011, 1:26 am
I.B.2. of Form S-3 and Form F-3 such that an offering of non-convertible securities would be eligible to be registered on such forms if the issuer, as of a date within 60 days prior to the filing of the registration statement on Form S-3 or Form S-4, has issued in the last three years at least $1 billion aggregate principal amount of non-convertible securities, other than common equity, in primary offerings for cash (excluding exchange offerings), in… [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 3:36 pm
Simply stated, Prop 13 caps the maximum taxation rate for realty at 1% and the maximum increase for an assessment at 2% annually. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 12:21 pm
It depends on 4 things 1) location 2) amount you had to drink 3) what you are trying to avoid 4) your prior history. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 3:35 am
The defendant must have instituted proceedings against the plaintiff 1) without probable cause, 2) with malice, and 3) the proceedings must have terminated in favor of the plaintiff. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 9:27 am
This program paved the way for what would become known as the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH).[1] Today, the PPH includes patent offices in many of the world’s largest economies and is growing.[2] Despite the USPTO’s estimate of a 94% overall allowance rate for PPH applications as compared to 44% for non-PPH cases when the United States is the Office of Second Filing,[3] practitioners have continued to be wary of using the new program, especially when… [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 8:58 am
I §10 cl.3. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 1:03 am
3. [read post]
12 Feb 2011, 3:11 pm
(1) Willie Gary marketing tactics (2) [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 8:32 pm
This statutory restriction does not bar behind the scenes advice to a client. 18 U.S.C. 207(c)(1), which imposes a one-year prohibition on communications by former senior Executive Branch officials to their former department when those communications are knowingly made with the intent to influence the department ‘in connection with any matter on which such persons seeks official action by any officer or employee of such department. [read post]
Big Law Firm Set to Review Client Base & Set New Client Minimum Billing Threshold of $200,000 a Year
11 Feb 2011, 11:03 am
2. [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 7:07 am
” John Wallbillich at The Wired GC goes further: “What about a firm that does $1 million plus for a client not charging for telephone consultations with a defined number of client in-house counsel? [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 6:30 am
Complaint alleging breach of clauses 1 (accuracy) and 3 (privacy) of the Code of Practice. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 8:59 am
Some of the main conclusions from that body of scholarship are that (1) the public databases of patents are often difficult to search, and can be out of date, and incomplete; (2) despite generally similar legal criteria, the outcomes of patent examination in different patent jurisdictions are quite different; (3) IPR are copious and atomized into a profusion of patents with overlapping claims; and (4) no one is curating the global body of patent data. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 2:28 am
Application argued (1) that just because there is a vehicle called a "monster truck" does not mean that "monster" is descriptive of automotive accessories, (2) that "monster" per se has no direct relationship with automotive accessories, and (3) because average consumers do not drive monster trucks, the word "monster" does not directly describe automotive accessories. [read post]
