Search for: "United States v. Holder" Results 1861 - 1880 of 4,280
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Sep 2020, 7:35 am by Jason Rantanen
United States, 273 U.S. 236, 241 (1927), “No formal granting of a license is necessary in order to give it effect. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 11:56 am by Florian Mueller
On the occasion of today's iPhone 5 presentation, I'm now going to explain why it's highly unlikely that sales of Apple's new smartphone will be disrupted by any patent holder in the coming months. [read post]
27 Jun 2007, 10:46 am
Zeneca and ICI agreed to: (1) pay Barr $21 million; (2) pay Barr’s supplier $35.9 million; and (3) supply Barr with Zeneca-manufactured tamoxifen for resale in the United States at a high royalty rate. [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 10:44 am by Florian Mueller
At any rate, I would view the $5 per-unit refund to BlackBerry as another indication of my $20 per-unit royalty estimate not having been off base.If Qualcomm's royalty levels are indeed extremely high, it comes as no surprise that various major automative and information and communications technology companies are interested in the ongoing FTC v. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 6:22 am by Adam Chandler
” Also, at PrawfsBlawg, Bill Araiza compares three recent Supreme Court cases—Citizens United, United States v. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 4:00 am by David Markus
United States, a Massachusetts case, the justices have been asked to determine whether they meant what they wrote about juries and drug sentences in Alleyne v. [read post]
26 Feb 2012, 2:47 pm by John Elwood
United States, 11-799; Vance v. [read post]
21 Nov 2023, 4:00 am by Michael Woods and Gordon LaFortune
Changes made to address similar findings on the processor issue in the CUSMA challenge were met with a sharp rebuke from the United States and a new trade challenge. [read post]
13 Sep 2021, 11:55 am by Jason Rantanen
  Moreover, Judge Higginson points out that both HTC and Ericsson, as well as the United States as amicus curiae, requested jury instructions on apportionment. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 11:35 am by David Oscar Markus
The question for the justices was whether that state law conflicted with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which allows voters to register using a federal form that asks, “Are you a citizen of the United States? [read post]