Search for: "IN RE SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY"
Results 61 - 80
of 169
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Dec 2011, 6:30 am
Judge Linn further discussed the Supreme Court's decision to deny petition for certiorari in In re Seagate Technology, L.L.C. [read post]
13 Dec 2011, 4:18 pm
HTC first argued that In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 11:34 am
Seagate won a $525,000 trade secret award in an arbitration against Western Digital, which Seagate accused of misappropriating trade secrets through a former Seagate employee. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 3:39 am
Joseph Casino and Michael Kasdan, In re Seagate Technology: Willfulness and Waiver, a Summary and a Proposal, 2007 Patently-O Patent L.J. 1. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 6:55 am
By contrast, the directors at Seagate Technology (STX) each made more than $340,000 last fiscal year (ending July 1) — and as much as $396,645, according to the proxy the company filed on Monday. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 11:42 pm
Yes, it can be done: Siemens AG v Seagate Technology (Ireland) (PatLit) Poland Court of Conciliation for Internet Domains dismisses complaint brought by Bisazza S.p. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 8:58 pm
Res. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 6:58 pm
As discussed in Lucent Technologies, Inc., v. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 3:12 pm
., and Seagate Technology (collectively, “Respondents”) in Certain Semiconductor Chips and Products Containing Same (Inv. [read post]
16 May 2011, 9:07 am
How well grounded such beliefs are is also unclear, but the risks may have been reduced in In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 12:31 am
The standard for establishing that a claim is "objectively baseless" under section 285 "is identical to the objective recklessness standard for enhanced damages and attorneys' fees against an accused infringer for § 284 willful infringement actions under In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 6:47 pm
(IP finance) United States US Patents – Decisions CAFC: In re Katz (part 2): Indefiniteness of computer processes (Patently-O) CAFC: Altair illustrates how to win by losing: Altair v Leddynamics (IPBiz) District Court E D Wisconsin: In Re Seagate does not dictate standard for pleading willful infringement claim: Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation, et. al. v. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 2:39 pm
· Limit enhanced damages, In re Seagate, 497 F. 3d 1360 (Fed. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 3:17 am
Google (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) [read post]
20 Feb 2011, 9:44 pm
(Reexamination Alert) Recapture doctrine before the CAFC: In re Mostafazedeh (Patents Post-Grant) US Patents – Decisions District Court S D New York: Patentee’s ‘sufficiently plausible’ belief as to the scope of patents negates intent to deceive necessary for false marking claim: Max Impact v Sherwood Group (Docket Report) District Court E D Texas – Marshall jury verdict for plaintiff; invalidity rejected even under ‘preponderance’ standard: Alexsam… [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 8:22 am
Seaman, "Willful Patent Infringement and Enhanced Damages After In re Seagate: An empirical Study" (link) [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 4:30 am
Berry (Cooley) is researching how In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 3:30 am
"The objective baselessness standard for enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees against a non-prevailing plaintiff under Brooks Furniture is identical to the objective recklessness standard for enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees against an accused infringer for § 284 willful infringement actions under In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 4:08 pm
" In re Seagate Tech., LLC, 497 F.3d 1360, 1371 (Fed. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 8:48 am
” In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360, 1371 (Fed. [read post]
