Search for: "OR Specific, Inc."
Results 1081 - 1100
of 37,634
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jun 2016, 6:59 am
" Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., CBM2014-00190 (PTAB May 26, 2016, Order) (Elluru, APJ) [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 8:57 am
The issue in this case is whether Preterm-Cleveland Inc. has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the whole or some specific provisions of the 2013 Ohio Budget Bill Am.Sub.H.B.No 59 as violating Ohio’s one-subject rule. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 8:09 am
" SynQor, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 10:59 am
In Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 1:24 pm
Last month, in Medidata Solutions, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2022, 7:40 am
Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. [read post]
30 Mar 2022, 7:40 am
Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. [read post]
9 Aug 2023, 8:27 am
Sanderling failed to timely identify any specific factual disputes. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:49 am
Whereas the plaintiffs proposed a relatively basic consent to join form, the defendant took the position that each opt-in plaintiff should be required to specifically opt-in to one or both of the specific claims alleged by the plaintiffs. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 12:12 pm
The Court just granted certiorari in a new case—Relentless, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 5:45 pm
” Vas-Cath Inc. v. [read post]
16 Oct 2009, 10:52 am
Capitol Records, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 5:30 pm
Americo Life, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 4:28 pm
While the district court acknowledged this argument, it did not specifically address it on the merits. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 7:46 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
18 Sep 2022, 3:21 pm
REV. 2020 (2009). https://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Oman_MLR.pdf Amendment and Plan of Merger by and among X Holdings I, Inc., X Holdings II, Inc. and Twitter, Inc. dated as of April 25, 2022 https://kimberlydkrawiec.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Musk-Twitter-Agreement.pdf [read post]
23 May 2011, 8:51 pm
Specifically, Tessera argues that the Commission erred when it found that the “top layer” of claim 1 cannot include the solder mask layer of the ac- cused wBGA products. [read post]
16 Jul 2019, 7:21 am
Responding to a challenge brought by BISSELL Homecare, Inc., NAD noted that Reckitt Benckiser’s “#1 Brand” claim is properly understood to mean that the brand itself, rather than any specific product, holds the highest market share in its relevant category. [read post]
18 May 2014, 11:03 am
The memorandum attacks specific provisions of the irrevocable trust, but the arguments of the Office of Medicaid usually reflect an intentional misinterpretation, based largely on dicta, of Massachusetts trust law. [read post]
18 May 2014, 11:03 am
The memorandum attacks specific provisions of the irrevocable trust, but the arguments of the Office of Medicaid usually reflect an intentional misinterpretation, based largely on dicta, of Massachusetts trust law. [read post]
