Search for: "Gray v. Gray et al" Results 121 - 140 of 244
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Apr 2010, 10:00 pm by Scott Wolfe Jr
Crilot Co., et al (466 So.2d 61) wherein a subcontractor’s lien against a property for excavation work related to the operation of a sand pit was challenged. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 1:42 pm by Brett Trout
While the Supreme Court takes very few patent cases, if any case has the chops to make it to the bigs, Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 7:18 am
Wal-Mart Stores Inc, et al (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) District Court N D Illinois: Inventor/plaintiff’s Managing Director not given highly confidential technical information: McDavid Knee Guard Inc v Nike USA Inc (Chicago Intellectual Property Law Blog) District Court E D Pennsylvania: Warsaw Orthpedic awarded $2M in Globus patent dispute (Patent Docs) District Court E D Texas: ‘I have good cause but it’s a secret’… [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 7:14 am
Norman Gray et al. and Allstate Insurance Company, 41 AD2d 863]. [read post]
20 May 2021, 2:57 am by Jessica Kroeze
The refusal cites documentsD1: TSAI D-M ET AL: "The evaluation of normalized cross correlations for defect detection", PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, ELSEVIER, AMSTERDAM, NL, vol. 24, no. 15, November 2003, pages 2525-2535D2: TSAI D-M ET AL: "Fast normalized cross correlation for defect detection", PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, ELSEVIER, AMSTERDAM, NL, vol. 24, no. 15, November 2003, pages 2625-2631D3: R. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 2:30 am by Kelly
Deandre Cortez Way et al (1709 Blog) US Trade Marks – Decisions 4th Circuit: Post-purchase confused restroom users: Georgia Pacific Consumer Products v Von Drehle Corporation (The Trademark Blog) TTAB precedential no. 31: Opposer fails to prove priority, non-use, and fraud in BLACK BELT TV brouhaha (TTABlog) WYHA? [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 3:11 am by Kelly
Belkin International, Inc., et. al (Docket Report) District Court C D California: Diligence asserting inequitable conduct measured from date prior art was known to be relevant, not date prior art was known to exist: Aten International Co. [read post]
23 May 2011, 2:20 am by Kelly
Advising inventors, their spouses, and their start-up companies: James Joyce v Armstrong Teasdale (Patently-O) District Court N D California: Use of patent reexamination evidence in parallel litigation: Volterra Semiconductor Corporation v Primarion Inc (Patents Post-Grant) District Court E D California: Government’s approval of false marking settlement precludes later challenge that settlement was “staged” and therefore lacks preclusive effect: Champion… [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 1:29 am by Marie Louise
GE Healthcare, Ltd., et. al (Docket Report) District Court N D Texas: Judge Solis compares false marking to ‘someone who says, ‘I am not married,’ when indeed, they are’: United States of America, ex rel. [read post]