Search for: "USA v. Little" Results 1001 - 1020 of 1,204
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Apr 2010, 9:28 am by Colleen McGushin
On April 9, the Texas Supreme Court granted review in Marsh USA Inc, et al. v. [read post]
8 Apr 2010, 9:48 am by Bexis
Here’s a dirty little secret – plaintiffs’ lawyers really love preemption. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 6:50 am by Adam Chandler
United States and Barber v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 6:45 am by Jay Willis
Jordan Weissman at the National Law Journal previews the “little-noticed” case of Robertson v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 6:58 am
Dickstein Shapiro (Patently-O) ITC: No s 337 violation; investigation terminated in Certain Semiconductor Integration Circuits Using Tungsten Metallization and Products Containing Same involving complainants LSI and Agere (ITC 337 Law Blog) Fleshing out design patent infringement doctrine: Crocs v ITC (Patently-O)   US Patents – Lawsuits and strategic steps Billingnetwork Patent – Court orders plaintiff to file separate patent suits against each defendant: Billingnetwork… [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 8:20 am by Marta Requejo
Joltid subsequently registered its copyright in the source code in the USA and commenced proceedings in the USA against Skype and its various investors (which were not parties to the licence) for copyright infringement. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 2:09 pm by Robinson, Calcagnie & Robinson
BIC USA, Inc., 136 F.Supp.2d 196, 207-208 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (Consumer Product Safety Commission) (“The CPSC regulations establish general, rudimentary and minimal requirements. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 2:47 pm by Steven Taber
. --- Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, February 25, 2010 The Federal Aviation Administration issued a “determination of no hazard” January 21, 2010 for the proposed Gamesa Energy USA wind energy project that would put 30 windmills atop an ecologically sensitive ridge on Shaffer Mountain in Somerset County, Pennsylvania. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 10:14 pm by Howard Knopf
I’ve said very little about the Google Book Settlement (“GBS”) to date because it is so complex and because is raises so many unanswerable questions. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 4:34 pm by Howard Knopf
This is potentially a cost of $6.5 million a year for Canadian taxpayers, which seems absurd in view of the Supreme Court of Canada's CCH v. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 9:30 am by Anna Christensen
  The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, CNN, and Politico all report on the new bill, which was introduced by Senator Charles Schumer and Representative Chris Van Hollen to mitigate the effects of Citizens United v. [read post]