Search for: "MATTER OF A J S" Results 1661 - 1680 of 19,320
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Apr 2011, 8:38 pm by Ryan McCabe
In a previous blog I discussed the court's holdings in L-J, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 7:34 am by The Docket Navigator
The court could exercise subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff's declaratory relief action premised on two foreign infringement actions. [read post]
8 May 2015, 5:25 am
These were the same product classes of Nokia’s that were found not to infringe by Floyd J, confirmed in the previous appeal proceedings.Essentiality of the Patent (to the UMTS standard)As simply put by Birss J himself: 121. [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 7:17 am
 To remind readers of the designs in question, the image below shows the CRD, an example of the Trunki case and an example of the Kiddee case.From left to right: Magmatic's registered design; their Trunki case; and PMS's allegedly infringing Kiddee caseAt first instance, Arnold J held that there was infringement. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 1:13 pm by Jamie Markham
Under G.S. 15A-101(4a), in criminal matters, “[j]udgment is entered when sentence is pronounced. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 1:13 pm by Jamie Markham
Under G.S. 15A-101(4a), in criminal matters, “[j]udgment is entered when sentence is pronounced. [read post]
26 Jun 2023, 1:07 am by INFORRM
Fancourt J commented that this pair have recently had “a lot to say about this matter outside of court. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 4:00 am
Nov. 16, 2022 Foglietta, J.), the trial court issued a Rule 1925 Opinion follow the entry of a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff in an automobile accident litigation matter. [read post]
14 Sep 2022, 5:00 am
June 3, 2022 Caffrey, J.), the court found that the Plaintiff did not meet the requirements of Pa. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 7:09 am by Docket Navigator
Following a jury trial, the court denied plaintiff's motion for judgment as a matter of law that its patent was not obvious and rejected plaintiff's argument that it should have been permitted to present the dollar amount of its license with a patent aggregator as a secondary consideration of nonobviousness. [read post]