Search for: "United States v. Smart" Results 161 - 180 of 1,132
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2020, 8:17 pm by Bona Law PC
United, Inc., the Supreme Court has “consistently stated” that “’the immediate buyers from the alleged antitrust violators’ may maintain a suit against the antitrust violators. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 4:57 pm by Matthew D. Roy
People saddled with unbearable debts are often able to take advantage of the United States bankruptcy laws and seek relief by filing a petition for bankruptcy. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 7:52 am by John Bratt
The trial court's ruling was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. [read post]
26 Dec 2012, 8:30 am by Douglas Jarrett
Despite Verizon Wireless’s opposing view, the Data Roaming Order aligns the United States with the rest of the world as data roaming is seen as an impetus for growth in the mobile data services market. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 4:15 am by Florian Mueller
Cheney of the United States International Trade Commission (USITC, or just ITC) gave notice that the investigation of Ericsson's complaint over Apple's alleged infringement of cellular standard-essential patents (SEPs)--with Ericsson seeking a limited exclusion order against certain Apple gadgets and Apple arguing that an import ban over SEPs gives rise to an "unclean hands" defense--has been reassigned to Administrative Law Judge Bryan F. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 10:33 pm
(a) No evidence obtained by an officer or other person in violation of any provisions of the Constitution or laws of the State of Texas, or of the Constitution or laws of the United States of America, shall be admitted in evidence against the accused on the trial of any criminal case.... [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 2:24 pm by Gene Quinn
§ 271(a) says: "whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States, or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent. [read post]