Search for: "United States v. Cunningham" Results 161 - 180 of 247
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jun 2024, 9:40 am by Dennis Crouch
Section 271(e)(1) states that it “shall not be an act of infringement to make, use, offer to sell, or sell within the United States or import into the United States a patented invention … solely for uses reasonably related to the development and submission of information under a Federal law which regulates the manufacture, use, or sale of drugs or veterinary biological products. [read post]
17 Dec 2011, 7:11 am by Mark S. Humphreys
The United States District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, issued an opinion in November 2011, in the case styled "839 East 19th Street, LP v. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 4:29 am
We've already deplored the recent decision of the West Virginia Supreme Court rejecting the learned intermediary rule outright, State ex rel. [read post]
1 Mar 2008, 8:48 pm
Cunningham, 337 Or. 528, 99 P.3d 271 (Or. 2004), and the very recent State v. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 10:14 am by Quinta Jurecic
The question is whether the United States is politically and militarily prepared to dig in for a 10- or 20-year campaign. [read post]
27 Mar 2024, 10:56 am by Matt Kurnick
By the time the devices were imported into the United States, the Myval System had been approved for use in India and Europe, but not in the United States. [read post]