Search for: "Doe Nos."
Results 1361 - 1380
of 2,061
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jan 2012, 5:57 am
Nos. 39 and 40.)In response, the government has filed a classified, as well as a redacted, unclassified memorandum opposing the motions. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 4:08 pm
Patent Nos. 6,757,322 and RE42,219. [read post]
17 Jan 2012, 9:53 am
Patent Nos. 5,978,063; 5,375,006; 5,621,556; and 6,121,941. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 2:32 pm
Patent Nos. 6,845,327 and 6,896,778 and asking the court to determine the legal title holder of the patents. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 1:29 pm
Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case Nos. 10-35966 & 10-36029. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 8:46 am
(Case Nos. 10-55691 and 10-55800 – 9th Cir. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 7:22 am
* * *Al-Khawaja and Tahery v United Kingdom, (Nos 26766/05 and 2228/06, decided December 15, 2011) is a new and very important decision from the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights on confrontation. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 5:01 am
One does not act in good faith in the tax world by getting one’s tax advice from a dentist and from a convicted tax protester organizer. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 4:33 pm
” FDA, in its petition denial, says that the Agency does not agree that a requirement to add the application number to product labels (both products approved under NDAs and ANDAs) would address the issues identified by PRN Publishing. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 8:12 pm
Patent Nos. 5,481,721 (the ‘721 patent) and 6,275,983 (the ‘983 patent) because Apple had not demonstrated that HTC infringed the asserted claims of these patents or that Apple had satisfied the domestic industry requirement with respect to these patents. [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 6:09 pm
Patent Nos. 7,292,151 (the ‘151 patent) and 7,492,268 (the ‘268 patent). [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 2:57 am
Well, the case is not strictly about Dog, it does derive from litigation surrounding him. [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 4:11 pm
As detailed below, the ALJ found that Apple does not infringe various claims of U.S. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 1:23 pm
Parexel Int’l LLC, ARB No. 07-123, ALJ Nos. 2007-SOX-039, -042 (ARB May 25, 2011) (holding that the heightened pleading standard of federal courts does not apply to SOX claims before the Department of Labor and affirming that allegations of shareholder fraud are not a requirement under the SOX whistleblower provisions); Johnson v. [read post]
28 Dec 2011, 7:56 pm
’s (“Funai”) motion to compel responses to Interrogatory Nos. 1, 5, and 6. [read post]
28 Dec 2011, 4:34 pm
Allstate Ins Co, Nos. 142545, 142547, four justices of the Michigan Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 9:15 pm
Citizens United also does not disturb the validity of the anti-circumvention interest. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 9:11 pm
Notes: The ITC does not have power to award damages. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:48 pm
Specifically, the ALJ found that Apple does not infringe various claims of U.S. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 10:47 am
— Doe VIII v. [read post]
