Search for: "United States v. ONE ARTICLE OF DEVICE, ETC."
Results 141 - 160
of 163
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 May 2010, 4:36 pm
Circuit’s recent decision in Comcast v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 4:12 pm
Pa. 2008); Colon v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 12:21 pm
However, the Court appears to recognize that there are other ways of demonstrating intent, as through reference to state law, arbitral rules, etc. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 2:13 pm
In the first installment of the series, Berin and I critiqued an old idea that’s suddenly gained new currency: taxing media devices or distribution systems to fund media content. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 5:04 am
U.S. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2010, 4:56 am
(Docket Report) Update to recent patent damages article (Patently-O) US patent counts, Q1 2010 (Patent Librarian's Notebook) Bilski predictions: Justice Stevens (Patently-O) US Patents – Decisions CAFC reverses District Court finding of indefiniteness: Hearing Components, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 2:17 pm
One could possibly, therefore, emerge from that program with a deep understanding of comparative legal issues but only a cursory understanding of the international legal system, the Geneva Conventions, the role of the United Nations, etc. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 3:17 pm
But instead of just taxing “televisions”—which would be very difficult in a world of technological convergence where consumers can “watch television” on any number of devices (PCs, mobile phones, portable gaming devices, portable media players, etc.) [read post]
16 Feb 2010, 9:17 am
In the case of Qualitex Co. v. [read post]
28 Nov 2009, 7:35 am
At least one of the defendants, Jose Carranza, 28, is an illegal alien with a criminal record, but yet had been able to remain in the United States. [read post]
6 Jun 2009, 9:07 pm
Chakrabarty, supra, at 308, quoting United States v. [read post]
24 May 2009, 6:47 pm
Griffing's article, however, contains many distortions that greatly undermine his analysis.Freedom of SpeechGriffing argues that, if passed, the hate crimes measure would violate the First Amendment, and he likens the proposed law to the notorious Sedition Act of 1789, which made it a crime to "write, print, utter or publish" material criticizing the President, Congress or the United States. [read post]
26 Mar 2009, 10:51 am
Perkins, 748 F.2d 1519, 1533 (11th Cir.1984); United States v. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 12:20 pm
As I explained in my past last May, in U.S. v. [read post]
1 Aug 2008, 12:13 am
Built like a tank - almost three pounds v. the usual featherweight disposable pieces of junk bundled with most PCs today. [read post]
23 Feb 2008, 4:24 am
L.J. 999 (2006)With the exception of changing the format to fit the Journal's format, this Brief has been reproduced as it was filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. [read post]
29 Oct 2007, 9:44 pm
" (3)However, some nations such as the United States of America (USA) and the United Kingdom (UK) have at points sought to make methods of execution less liable to bungling or to inflicting gratuitous suffering. [read post]
15 Mar 2007, 8:03 am
[16] Moreover, unlike the theory prevalent in the United States today, the Romans were not concerned with writing down laws for the masses to read for themselves. [read post]
6 Feb 2007, 10:05 am
Analog Devices, 375 F.3d 1113 (Fed. [read post]
