Search for: "POTTER v DISTRICT COURT" Results 81 - 100 of 280
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Aug 2014, 4:24 am by Ben
 Automated Solutions Corporation v. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 9:01 pm by John Dean
District Court, better known as the Keith Case, named after the U.S. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 6:28 am by Joy Waltemath
In a vigorous dissent, Judge O’Brien contended that she failed to establish that similar push-back by male employees had come close to her “critical, obnoxious, insulting, and accusatory behavior” (Potter v Synerlink Corp, April 21, 2014, Matheson, S). [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 5:34 am
The district court explained the background of the patent as follows: In 1998, United States patent number 5,729,659 (the '659 patent) was issued to Jerry L. [read post]
14 Nov 2013, 1:54 pm by Ken White
The district court's instructions tracked the contours of this legal framework. [read post]
8 Nov 2013, 5:00 am by Steven Boranian
  By the way, the California Supreme Court and the District of the California Court of Appeal that decided Conte share a courthouse just one and a half miles from our storefront fortune teller. [read post]
24 Oct 2013, 2:08 pm by Steve Delchin
  The panel in Eden Foods thus affirmed the district court’s denial of Eden Food’s motion for a preliminary injunction and remanded to the district court with instructions to dismiss Potter’s claims for lack of jurisdiction. [read post]
24 Oct 2013, 2:08 pm by Steve Delchin
  The panel in Eden Foods thus affirmed the district court’s denial of Eden Food’s motion for a preliminary injunction and remanded to the district court with instructions to dismiss Potter’s claims for lack of jurisdiction. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 8:06 am by Florian Mueller
Intuitively one might be led to think that if a district court finds nine lines of code copyrightable, a body of 7,000 lines -- at issue in the very same litigation -- would be a no-brainer. [read post]
28 May 2013, 2:48 pm by Florian Mueller
This afternoon by Eastern Time the public version of Google's brief in the cross-appeal of a district court's Oracle v. [read post]