Search for: "Motion" Results 6161 - 6180 of 150,869
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2011, 11:08 am by Shari Shapiro
So, it's pretty clear that the USGBC is marketing directly to consumers, contrary to the Memorandum of Law in support of the USGBC's Motion to Dismiss. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 8:44 am by Gregory J. Brodzik
Prior to this motion, “plaintiffs further amended their complaint to allege infringement of [U.S. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 9:18 am by Gregory J. Brodzik
Judge Sleet, however, denied without prejudice Edwards' motion in limine which sought to preclude Medtronic from presenting or arguing to the jury "hypothetical uses of the porcine pericardial tissue that Medtronic supplied and/or supplies from the United States to Mexico." [read post]
25 Mar 2013, 10:28 am by Samantha G. Wilson
Of the fifty-six defendants involved, forty-six filed motions to transfer venue to Michigan. [read post]
30 Dec 2010, 7:08 am by Pilar G. Kraman
LG and AUO opposed Anvik’s motion, primarily because granting Anvik’s motion would modify the hotly contested Protective Order in the Delaware case. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 4:51 am
Google challenged the expert report with a Daubert motion, which the district court granted in July 2011. [read post]
12 Mar 2013, 2:57 pm by Gregory J. Brodzik
In view of granting plaintiff’s motion, Judge Sleet denied defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as moot. [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 4:14 pm by Gregory J. Brodzik
After the PTO granted defendant’s request for inter partes reexamination in December 2012, defendant filed a renewed motion to stay—the motion at issue in Judge Sleet’s recent memorandum opinion. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 3:52 pm by Eric Schweibenz
  After reviewing the confidential and non-confidential versions of the Agreements, ALJ Rogers granted the joint motion filed by Lilly, Hospira and Intas. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 8:56 am by Kate Fort
Accordingly, in deciding these motions the Court will express no opinion on the merits – only on the preliminary matters. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 1:16 pm
  Judge Davis denied the motion, noting that "[w]hile the Court always encourages parties to focus their cases to the most relevant claims and references, the Court does not usually impose a limit on the number of claims and references because parties naturally withdraw claims and references that are not viable for use at trial. [read post]