Search for: "Doe Nos."
Results 161 - 180
of 2,051
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jan 2019, 11:57 am
See Implementing the Anti-Spoofing Provisions of the RAY BAUM’S Act, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WC Docket Nos. 18-335, 11-39, FCC-CIRC1901-05 (draft publicly released Jan. 3, 2019); https://www.fcc.gov/document/implementing-anti-spoofing-provisions-ray-baums-act. [read post]
14 Jan 2019, 11:57 am
See Implementing the Anti-Spoofing Provisions of the RAY BAUM’S Act, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WC Docket Nos. 18-335, 11-39, FCC-CIRC1901-05 (draft publicly released Jan. 3, 2019); https://www.fcc.gov/document/implementing-anti-spoofing-provisions-ray-baums-act. [read post]
7 Dec 2008, 12:48 am
Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit, Nos. 07-2190, 07-2204 The U.S. [read post]
27 Jan 2008, 7:38 am
Cato Journal, Vol. 15, Nos. 2-3 (Fall/Winter 1995/96). [read post]
20 Oct 2021, 8:53 pm
It also points out that most of the companies targeted by Nokia with patent assertions don't countersue, but OPPO does have a very significant 5G patent portfolio of its own.As a follow-up to my list of Western European Nokia v. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 10:53 am
Keller, Nos. 11-1172-1173 (3d. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 8:15 am
Cir. 2014) The GPS patents in suit are Fleming’s Reissue Nos. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 2:24 pm
Patent Nos. 7,349,540,... [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 8:00 am
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, Nos. 11-5015 et al., 2012 U.S. [read post]
6 Oct 2017, 8:20 am
Patent Nos. 8,829,165 and 8,859,741. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 7:59 pm
Nater, Nos. 302991 and 303064], the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s pretrial evidentiary ruling barring the admission of evidence of other acts committed by defendants, finding that the evidence of prior bad acts was introduced for a proper purpose under MRE 404(b), and did not unfairly prejudice the defendants. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 1:26 pm
Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, Case Nos. 05-2399, 06-2020 & 06-2021. [read post]
12 Aug 2012, 7:58 pm
And this decision does not give any reason for counsel and parties to relax their diligence. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 3:46 am
It is up to Congress whether to implement obligationsundertaken under a treaty which (like this one) does notitself have the force and effect of domestic law sufficient toset aside the judgment or the ensuing sentence, and Congresshas not progressed beyond the bare introduction of abill in the four years since the ICJ ruling and the fourmonths since our ruling in MedellÃÂn v. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 2:09 am
Obschestvo s ogranitchennoy;otvetstvennostiu "WDS", Oppositions Nos. 91182207 and 91184467 (June 16, 2010) [precedential].Under TTAB precedent, a party seeking to invoke Rule 33(b) must meet three conditions: (1) it "must identify documents which the responding party knows to contain the responsive information, and may not merely agree to provide access to a voluminous collection of records which may contain the responsive information;" (2) it "may not rely on the… [read post]
17 Dec 2021, 5:59 pm
Patent Nos. 7,076,624, 7,536,524, 8,234,477, and 9,361,243. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 9:58 am
What does the data say about whether and to what extent plaintiffs who have had their data compromised actually suffer out of pocket losses? [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 9:48 pm
., Nos. 2011-1143, -1228 (Fed. [read post]
12 May 2007, 9:10 pm
Beach, Nos. 05-3362 - 063053 (10th Cir. [read post]
12 May 2007, 9:10 pm
Beach, Nos. 05-3362 - 063053 (10th Cir. [read post]
