Search for: "State ex rel. Doe v. Register" Results 1 - 20 of 168
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Mar 2015, 5:52 am
  A “consent” theory based on the mere fact of being registered to do business in the state did succeed in Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 7:24 am
Consequently, the sign was registered as a Community trade mark (CTM) on 27 September 2005 (No. 1121839). [read post]
16 Nov 2007, 8:25 am
Doe, a convicted sexual offender, alleges that the Registration Act and the Surveillance Act violate the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution. [read post]
22 Nov 2012, 1:51 am by Prashant Reddy
Concluding the argument, the patent agents state “Therefore we submit that the vehicle/product of this invention does not fall within the scope of Section 5(a) of the Patent Act.” [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:47 am
The expert determined that the email address was registered to Mr. [read post]
15 Feb 2013, 10:55 am by Mark Terry
In one of its first decisions today, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) upheld an Examiner's 35 U.S.C. 103 obviousness rejection, citing, as it often does, the KSR v. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 11:57 am
  Defendants had no in-state offices, real estate, were not registered to do business, had no address, phone numbers, bank accounts, or employees.Google Inc. v. [read post]
24 Mar 2017, 10:16 am by John R. Phillips
Kokesh’s (“Kokesh”) misappropriation of funds from four SEC-registered business development companies (“BDC”). [read post]