Search for: "Field Controls, L.L.C."
Results 41 - 55
of 55
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jul 2011, 12:18 pm
Postal Inspection Service; the FBI Miami Field Office; and the state of Florida's Office of Financial Regulation. [read post]
19 Feb 2011, 3:32 pm
The patent at issue in Aristocrat covered a slot machine with a "control means" to control displayed images, to define a set of predetermined arrangements for a given game depending on the player's selections, and to pay a prize when a predetermined arrangement of symbols was displayed. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 5:06 pm
Adams & Assoc., L.L.C. v. [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 4:27 pm
Also, the statute was originally intended to control interstate computer crime only, but, with the development of the Internet, virtually all computer use has become interstate use and thus subject to the Act. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 3:13 am
Abdon Callais Offshore, L.L.C., No. 99-3759, 2000 WL 1145825 (E.D. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 5:18 am
” Personalized Media Commc’ns, L.L.C. v. [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 9:47 pm
" Personalized Media Commc'ns, L.L.C. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 1:58 pm
Graphic Controls Corp., 350 F.3d 1376, 1381-82 (Fed. [read post]
21 Mar 2010, 8:17 am
Ticketmaster L.L.C. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 3:05 am
Dragon Group, L.L.C., No. 392, 2009 (Del. [read post]
26 Sep 2009, 3:00 am
, Tyson Chicken Inc., Cobb-Ventress Inc., Cargill Turkey Production L.L.C., George's Inc., George's Farm Inc., Peterson Farms Inc., and Simmons Food Inc.Pictured: The "poultry litter" biomass plant in Benson, MN [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 4:00 am
In the Matter of Thayer Capital Partners, TC Equity Partners IV, L.L.C., TC Management Partners IV, L.L.C., and Frederick V. [read post]
18 Apr 2009, 1:46 pm
Fielding, (Tex. 2009)No. 07-0490 (Tex. [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 11:00 am
In re Neurobotics, L.L.C., Serial Nos. 78596887 and 785969571 (August 8, 2008) [not precedential].Examining Attorney Amy E. [read post]
19 Nov 2007, 1:14 pm
On the one hand, patentees are free to impose restrictions, such as field-of-use restrictions, when they license others to manufacture their patented products.[2] Such restrictions can be permissible even if they would be antitrust violations outside the patent context.[3] On the other hand, a patentee cannot restrict the use of its patented products once they are sold, whether the sale is by the patentee itself or by a licensee.[4] This is the exhaustion, or first-sale, doctrine. [read post]
