Search for: "California v. Harris" Results 1121 - 1140 of 1,485
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Apr 2008, 11:00 am
: (Patent Docs), US: Supreme Court declines to hear final Nucleonics’ appeal in gene-silencing patent dispute with Benitec Australia: (IP Law360), (Therapeutics Daily), US: 505(b)(2) drug approvals rock - Interaction of patents and exclusivity of drugs approved by FDA under section 505(b)(2): (Patent Baristas), US: StemCells’ patents survive reexam – StemCells and Neuralstem differ on extent of changes: (Patent Docs), US: StemCells announces issuance of… [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 5:29 pm by Lyle Denniston
  By a 5-to-4 vote, the court ruled in the case of Harris v. [read post]
27 Feb 2019, 7:54 am by John Elwood
Harris Funeral Homes Inc v. [read post]
1 May 2022, 4:30 pm by INFORRM
NGN has agreed to pay Dr Harris “substantial damages” plus legal costs, a settlement that was “tantamount to an admission of liability” of hacking at The Sun dating from his days as an MP. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:22 am by Kelly
Harris Manufacturing Company, LLC (Docket Report) District Court C D California: False marking Plaintiff lacks standing absent ‘concrete, particularized injury’ to United States: Shizzle v Aviva (Docket Report) BPAI’s ‘administrative estoppel’: Untraversed PTO findings may be barred in later PTO proceedings: Ex Parte Smith (271 Patent Blog) US Patents – Lawsuits and strategic steps Kruse – Kruse asserts diesel engine patents… [read post]
8 Aug 2018, 1:51 pm by Adam Feldman
California Teachers Association and Janus v. [read post]
24 Oct 2010, 11:48 pm by Marie Louise
Sharp Corporation, et. al (Docket Report) Stays pending patent reexamination: Sweetening the deal: TDY Industries v Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co (Patents Post Grant Blog) District Court E D California: False marking complaint alleging defendant had ‘no reasonable basis to believe’ its products were patented sufficiently pled intent to deceive: Hallstrom v. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 4:39 am by Benjamin Wittes
According to Shane Harris, writing in Foreign Policy: The same day, lawyers for the Electronic Frontier Foundation read Walton’s ruling and wondered why he didn’t acknowledge an order to preserve records that the group had sought in another lawsuit over government surveillance, Jewel v. [read post]
26 Aug 2024, 5:00 am by Taylor Gulatsi
Jennifer Davis: Sunday’s program included the interesting presentation: “Hachette Book Grp. v. [read post]