Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 401 - 420
of 8,219
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jul 2010, 7:44 am
United States, 144 U.S. 47, 59 (1892)United States v. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 5:01 pm
The district court held patent exhaustion was not an independent cause of action but instead a defense to an infringement claim, and dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction so any state law claims could be pursued in state court.The Federal Circuit affirmed, observing the case met neither of the criteria for § 1338(a) jurisdiction under the Supreme Court's decision in Christianson v. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 7:59 am
In referring to the recent TCL v Ericsson decision from the Central District of California (see Kat post here), Judge Labson stated:"The Court is not persuaded by Plaintiffs’ argument that summary judgment on Count III of the FAC is warranted. [read post]
7 Apr 2009, 1:01 am
EnglishBingoTicket.jpg In copyright action, trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence that copyright holder had engaged in illegal operations (by distributing an online bingo game in violation of state law) since the evidence "might improperly influence the jury to reduce the statutory damages award," in Dream Games of Arizona, Inc. v. [read post]
3 May 2008, 10:24 am
(Corporate Property Associates v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 1:26 pm
Appealed from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. [read post]
13 Mar 2012, 6:58 pm
Judge Stucky, writing for a unanimous court in United States v. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 7:21 am
The courts are also disinclined to decide Article 14 cases on the basis that the comparators are not in an analogous situation other than in very obvious cases: see R (Carson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2005] UKHL 37. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 9:53 am
See BMC Resources, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 6:44 pm
Biomedical Patent Management Corp. v. [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 5:00 pm
Per 13A-12-211, any unlawful distribution of a controlled substance of Schedules I through V is considered a Class B felony. [read post]
23 Aug 2013, 7:00 am
Per 13A-12-211, any unlawful distribution of a controlled substance of Schedules I through V is considered a Class B felony. [read post]
30 Jun 2021, 9:10 am
” Hence, Barret argued that the NGA cannot authorize certificate holders to take State-owned property. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 7:53 am
The Ninth Circuit granted the Petition for Review in Singh v Holder, specifically finding that the IJ/BIA's credibility findings were not supported by the record. [read post]
25 Oct 2017, 5:15 am
C&D Zodiac, Inc, United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, No. 2016-1496, 03 October 2017 appeared first on Kluwer Patent Blog. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 9:21 pm
Holder, 2011 U.S. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 12:25 pm
United States v. [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 8:00 am
Ramirez v. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 10:20 pm
The Ninth Circuit found a Catch-22 for secret account holders in a case, In re Grand Jury Investigation M.H. v. [read post]
