Search for: "TDY Industries"
Results 1 - 15
of 15
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Oct 2017, 5:56 am
Couldn’t the government have found an expert witness to testify that usage of these compounds was routine in the industry during this time? [read post]
24 Jan 2008, 9:27 pm
ESAB Group, TDY Industries and BOC Group. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 3:18 pm
Furthermore, the district court properly determined that “industrial operations undertaken for the purpose of national defense, standing alone, did not justify allocating all costs to the government. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 3:18 pm
Furthermore, the district court properly determined that “industrial operations undertaken for the purpose of national defense, standing alone, did not justify allocating all costs to the government. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 9:00 am
Last year we reported on TDY Holdings v. [read post]
16 Oct 2017, 12:13 pm
Powals will be allowed to testify on the standard practices of waste brokers, but will only be limited to industry standards and customs. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 3:04 am
(although a bit more “brute force” than our proposal) In TDY Industries Inc., v. [read post]
12 Oct 2010, 8:35 am
.'" TDY Industries Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2006, 4:53 am
., TDY Industries Inc. and the ESAB Group. [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 4:58 am
Still remaining as defendants in virtually every case are five of the biggest welding rod manufacturers: (1) Lincoln Electric Company, (2) BOC Group (formerly known as Airco) (3) ESAB Group, (4) TDY Industries (formerly known as Teledyne Industries and Teledyne McKay), and (5) Hobart Brothers Company. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 3:00 am
The ‘519 patent is currently the subject of a litigation styled TDY Industries Incorporated v. [read post]
24 Oct 2010, 11:48 pm
Sharp Corporation, et. al (Docket Report) Stays pending patent reexamination: Sweetening the deal: TDY Industries v Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co (Patents Post Grant Blog) District Court E D California: False marking complaint alleging defendant had ‘no reasonable basis to believe’ its products were patented sufficiently pled intent to deceive: Hallstrom v. [read post]
6 Jan 2011, 5:25 am
Illustrating the effectiveness of offering to mitigate the prejudicial delay inherent to reexamination, the Defendants in TDY Industries v. [read post]
6 Jan 2011, 5:25 am
Illustrating the effectiveness of offering to mitigate the prejudicial delay inherent to reexamination, the Defendants in TDY Industries v. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 3:07 am
(Docket Report) District Court Western Pennsylvania: Defendant’s agreement to temporarily discontinue infringing conduct warrants grant of stay pending re-examination: TDY Industries Inc. v. [read post]
