Search for: "Hoffman v. Hoffman"
Results 1501 - 1520
of 1,632
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Apr 2008, 10:40 am
Dave Hoffman has an interesting post over at Concurring Opinions on the dispute between Justices Stevens and Scalia (and Thomas) over whether the death penalty deters. [read post]
15 Apr 2008, 7:28 pm
By Kevin E. [read post]
13 Apr 2008, 9:17 am
" Maryland v Pringle, 540 US 366, 370-371 (2003) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). [read post]
13 Apr 2008, 9:02 am
Deputy Sonja V. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 3:54 am
Inc. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2008, 2:22 am
Inc. et al v. [read post]
1 Apr 2008, 2:16 am
Thus, the Federal Circuit held that Congress did not evince an intention to permit an application having additional disclosure to benefit from the § 121 safe harbor.Patent Docs also noted:Interestingly, the lawyer representing Pfizer before the Federal Circuit, Leora Ben-Ami of Kaye Scholer LLP, is also the lead trial attorney representing Hoffman-LaRoche against Amgen.IPBiz questions whether the Pfizer v. [read post]
31 Mar 2008, 9:25 pm
Noonan -- On October 23, 2007, Amgen procured a jury verdict that Hoffman-LaRoche's Mircera ® drug product infringed several Amgen patents. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 1:09 pm
Supreme Court, March 19, 2008 Snyder v. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 3:00 am
U.S. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2008, 10:05 am
David Hoffman graciously invited me back to comment on the Bear Stearns meltdown. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 11:19 am
In US v. [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 7:39 am
Roland v. [read post]
27 Feb 2008, 3:25 am
Inc. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2008, 11:02 am
A few weeks ago, I was debating the very interesting Kahan/Hoffman/Braman article on Scott v. [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 10:44 am
Judge Hoffman writes:Plaintiff-Appellant Manda Hill appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Michael Bolinger in Hill's legal malpractice action against Bolinger. [read post]
19 Feb 2008, 4:38 pm
An Empirical (and Normative) Assessment of Scott v. [read post]
18 Feb 2008, 5:00 pm
This is a short comment on the Court's decision last term in Scott v. [read post]
