Search for: "Apple v. State"
Results 661 - 680
of 4,008
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jan 2007, 7:25 am
AS AN ASIDE, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE HIGHEST DAMAGE AWARD CASES IN TRADEMARKS TEND TO BE REVERSE CONFUSION CASES, BUT IN THOSE CASES, IT TENDS TO BE DAVID v GOLIATH. [read post]
25 Jan 2022, 2:08 am
Qualcomm and Oracle v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 8:52 pm
Just like Apple, Nokia also appears to be very concerned that U.S. case law on patent injunctions, particularly in the Apple v. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 10:44 am
The document doesn't state any reasons: 15-11-19 CAFC Denial of Samsung v. [read post]
22 Oct 2017, 11:09 pm
Yesterday (Sunday), Judge Lucy Koh of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California determined that a new Apple v. [read post]
15 Aug 2020, 5:23 am
Apple was assigned to United States District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco (case no. 3:20-cv-05640). [read post]
29 Mar 2014, 2:49 am
I'm not going to do the usual preview post listing patents, products etc. before the trial in the second Apple v. [read post]
12 Feb 2022, 10:19 pm
Comments on social media--or even court filings, such as in Coronavirus Reporter v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 8:59 pm
About 24 hours after denying (except for a minor part) Apple's motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) following the spring 2014 Apple v. [read post]
14 May 2019, 10:36 am
Apple case, and there is a Qualcomm connection because of an old Qualcomm v. [read post]
10 Oct 2016, 5:17 pm
Apple v. [read post]
13 Feb 2008, 12:58 am
Blue Cross Blue Shield v. [read post]
13 Dec 2022, 5:53 am
State v. [read post]
10 Feb 2022, 2:39 pm
” Halo Elecs., Inc. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 2:21 am
Peter Guntz, later became a judge at the EPO.During the Apple v. [read post]
21 Mar 2016, 6:33 am
As a result, the Apple v. [read post]
27 Apr 2014, 6:05 am
On the one hand, there are the earlier Apple v. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 11:20 pm
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has granted Apple an extension until July 15 for its final brief, which in formal terms is only supposed to reinforce Apple's appeal of Epic's consolation prize from the district court (an injunction under California Unfair Competition Law) but which Apple will try to use in order to make some final points even on the more important issues in the case.There are two reasons for which Epic lost… [read post]
22 Oct 2012, 1:23 pm
No federal or state law required Apple to offer consumers voice and data plan choices with other telecoms when the iPhone came to market. [read post]
25 Feb 2022, 9:15 am
Supreme Court asks the Solicitor General to brief the court on the views of the U.S. federal government regarding the Article III standing issues in Apple v. [read post]
