Search for: "Doe Defendants 1 to 20"
Results 8521 - 8540
of 8,963
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Feb 2008, 6:00 pm
: (IP ThinkTank), When does the patent expire? [read post]
22 Feb 2008, 7:11 am
February 20, 2008). [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 9:32 pm
February 20, 2008): The Fourth Amendment does not protect all expectations of privacy; only those that society recognizes as reasonable and legitimate. [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 3:17 pm
[1] As one Google executive explains, the name Froogle "caused confusion for some because it doesn't clearly describe what the product does. [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 12:52 am
View the article here02/20/2008Sex offenders fighting Ohio's residency restrictions have won another legal battle, this one in the state Supreme Court.The high court today found that Ohio's law banning some sexual offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school is vague.A 6-1 majority ruled the law as written does not specify its use retroactively against defendants convicted before the statute took effect in 2003.The decision allows a… [read post]
17 Feb 2008, 2:56 pm
Federal law preempts state causes of action that aren't identical to federal standards, but does nothing to interfere with identical state laws. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 2:01 pm
App. 2d Cir. 06/20/07), 962 So. 2d 459. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 9:00 am
: (Spicy IP),USD 20 billion going off-patent: (Patent Circle),Canadian Prices Review Board asserts jurisdiction over products sold in US, but imported into Canada under Special Access Program: (Gowlings),Canadian Court of Appeal affirms decision allowing patent-owner to be joined to proceedings: Cobalt v Pfizer and Pharmascience v Pfizer: (Gowlings),PharmaStem appeals stem cell patent: asks for greater deference to patent examiners: PharmaStem … [read post]
13 Feb 2008, 12:38 pm
"Judge Bybee: "Does your firm have a website. [read post]
12 Feb 2008, 8:29 am
That is, we defend drug (and medical device) companies, not food companies. [read post]
11 Feb 2008, 11:20 pm
Furthermore, the Supreme Court was concerned with two defendants, referred as respondents throughout the opinion. [read post]
11 Feb 2008, 2:40 pm
You will make mistakes; everybody does. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 6:05 am
[20] Id [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 8:23 am
July 20, 2007) (retaining jurisdiction after dismissing the diverse co-defendant and rejecting claim that "home-state controversy exception" applied); Genenbacher v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 11:03 pm
Callahan, No. 08-1 0 100 (1 1th Cir. [read post]
28 Jan 2008, 7:16 pm
Now Larsen and his office are defending the only other men charged so far under the new law. [read post]
28 Jan 2008, 7:38 am
Does 1-22, 1:07-cv-057-JAW. [read post]
25 Jan 2008, 9:05 am
The plaintiffs then, however, made a post-verdict motion in which they requested "a hearing to determine the amount due to plaintiffs from defendants under [the parties' contract] for the period January 1, 2002 through February 20, 2002. [read post]
23 Jan 2008, 3:45 am
§ 1341] does not support any private right of action. [read post]
22 Jan 2008, 8:47 am
If a judge does require a hearing, it will be very quick- 15 minutes or less. [read post]
