Search for: "POST PROPERTIES, INC." Results 6461 - 6480 of 9,336
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2012, 6:15 am
All of these properties/issues cause substantial problems in women who have had mesh placed transvaginally for repair of POP. [read post]
23 May 2012, 2:56 am by Marie Louise
  Highlights this week included: CAFC: Judge Newman again questions the constitutionality of “do over” patent reexamination: In re Baxter International, Inc (Patents Post-Grant) (WHDA) (Inventive Step) (Patent Docs)   Please join the discussion [...] [read post]
22 May 2012, 9:41 pm by InvestorLawyers
” If you suffered losses as a result of your investment in the Retail Properties of America Inc. [read post]
21 May 2012, 1:15 am by Scott A. McKeown
The ability to file an ex parte patent reexamination as a “do over” relative to an adverse ruling of the courts remains a viable option even after the America Invents Act (save for those filers subject to the estoppel effect of Inter Partes Review or Post Grant Review) For a more in depth discussion of the majority position in In re Construction Equipment and the preclusive interplay between the new proceedings of the AIA, patent interferences and district court… [read post]
20 May 2012, 7:03 am by Fred Abrams
As discussed at my May 13th post, Capital Asset, Inc. [read post]
18 May 2012, 7:47 am by Rantanen
Guest post by Sarah Burstein, who will joining the faculty of University of Oklahoma College of Law this August. [read post]
15 May 2012, 7:29 am by Frank A. Bruno
Dengler, Counsel to the Gibbons Intellectual Property Department, co-authored this post. [read post]
14 May 2012, 7:37 am
In my prior blog posts, I covered the general rule in Georgia, which is that a property owner may be liable for failing to protect people on its property if the property owner had reason to believe a crime might occur. [read post]
14 May 2012, 7:14 am by Ron Miller
The court rejected the employee’s contention that its decision in Hopper v All Pet Animal Clinic, Inc, which involved a covenant not to compete given by an employee after commencement of her employment, supported his contention that consideration in addition to continued at-will employment is necessary to support a post-employment assignment of intellectual property rights. [read post]