Search for: "Smith v. United States of America"
Results 141 - 160
of 697
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Apr 2014, 8:42 am
United States - 4/28/14. [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 4:30 am
En el caso Return Mail v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 11:17 am
United States, 534 U.S.84, 94 (2001) (quoting Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 5:00 am
" Smith v. [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 5:56 pm
* Question presented: Whether the government is a “person” who may petition to institute review proceedings under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 1:02 pm
In some instances, like in United States v. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 10:02 am
Recently, in United States of America ex rel. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 3:39 pm
And not only that, but there is a 1988 federal United States Supreme Court case, Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. [read post]
9 Nov 2023, 10:59 am
He concluded with a statement that action is needed, otherwise “the United States will continue to cede technological supremacy to China. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 2:33 pm
These proposed rules come in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. [read post]
31 Mar 2021, 4:20 pm
It is specialists who tend to concentrate instead of his actual decisions as a practicing politician, whether candidate for higher office or as President of the United States. [read post]
27 Nov 2018, 9:30 am
It should surprise nobody that the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (universally described as the AIA) produces a steady diet of statutory interpretation problems for the Supreme Court to consider. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Inst. v. [read post]
29 Sep 2019, 2:35 pm
Patent ReexaminationPost-Issuance Review ProceedingsDefense in an Infringement ActionEx Parte ReexaminationInter Partes ReexaminationInter Partes ReviewPost-Grant ReviewCovered-Business-Method ReviewLeahy-Smith America Invents ActInterpretation (Statute)Dictionary ActIn the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011, 35 U. [read post]
2 Dec 2014, 3:14 am
United States, in which the Court is considering whether a Pennsylvania man can be held criminally liable for threatening statements he made on Facebook, dominated Court-related coverage and commentary. [read post]
15 Jul 2024, 5:31 am
[The primary effect, if not purpose, of international law, is to use lawfare to punish Israel, and by extension, the United States.] [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 5:47 pm
UnwiredPlanet, 841 F.3d at 1382.[ Appeal from the United States Patent and TrademarkOffice, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 1:10 pm
Therefore, in interpreting and applying this Code section, the courts of this state may draw from the opinions ofthe United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 12:45 pm
United States, 645 F.3d 1377 (Fed. [read post]
5 Jun 2011, 1:12 pm
United States Affirm Details Fox, v. [read post]
