Search for: "Doe Defendants I through V" Results 7421 - 7440 of 12,272
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Apr 2013, 2:54 am by Peter Mahler
Since the complaint does not set forth a specific or even a reasonably certain termination date, it does not satisfy the “definite term” element of section 62 (1) (b). [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
But I’m new, so I keep looking at the broken clocks and then realizing I have no idea what time it is. [read post]
20 Jul 2022, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
, and I thought I'd serialize it here, since I still have plenty of time to improve it; I'd love to hear your thoughts on it! [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:58 pm by Gilles Cuniberti
Article 34  does not help recognition: it offers grounds for denying it. [read post]
5 Apr 2014, 11:52 pm by Florian Mueller
With this post I want to contribute to the quality of the debate by sharing information on what a couple of particularly famous Apple touchscreen patents are about and, even more so, what kinds of ideas patent law does or does not reward with 20-year monopoly rights.Apple's four most famous touchscreen software patents are rubber-banding (the "overscroll bounce", asserted in the first Apple v. [read post]
13 Nov 2007, 9:01 pm
 I suspect that as more named defendants, many of which are outside the U.S. [read post]
18 May 2009, 3:36 am
The Supreme Court granted cert. today in a case, Free Enterprise Fund v. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 3:40 am by Peter Mahler
OK, math sticklers, I confess, I should have entitled this post, For Want of Two Pennies. [read post]