Search for: "B. v. S." Results 801 - 820 of 52,347
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Apr 2015, 7:03 pm by Nikki Siesel
See our blog post entitled, Should Federal Courts Be Bound By TTAB Rulings, where we review the prior proceedings of B&B Hardware, Inc. v. [read post]
The Federal Circuit held, however, that AAPA can be permissible in assessing whether the patent’s claims would have been obvious in an inter partes review proceeding as an admission in a patent’s specification, and remanded to the Board on that issue (Qualcomm Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 2:51 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
On appeal from: [2017] EWCA Civ 182 This appeal considered the interpretation of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s 1(2)(b). [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 11:23 pm by Ben Vernia
Comment: Judge Urbina’s decision to apply Rule 9(b) to retaliation claims under the FCA, 31 USC 3720(h), conflicts with the majority trend at the Court of Appeals level. [read post]
19 Aug 2014, 8:54 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Fair enough; it’s easy enough for B&N and other websites to improve the call-to-action language. [read post]
18 Jul 2016, 6:08 am by Robert L. Abell
Nevertheless, Judge Davis concurred based on the court’s prior decision in United States v. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 5:06 am by Walter Olson
Reader John B. alerts us: “If you haven’t already seen it, there’s excellent Overlawyered-type rhetoric from Justice Kennedy in Monday’s Supreme Court opinion on debt collectors’ liability under federal statutory law. [read post]