Federal Patent Court - PDFSEARCH.IO - Document Search Engine

Federal Patent Court
Results: 603

#	Item
151	On January 11, 2005, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s attorney fees award to Acorn of $399,[removed]under 35 U.S.C. § 285 based upon a determination that Bruno engaged in inequitable conduct while prose Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.umaryland.edu Language: English - Date: 2005-01-17 06:07:55 United States patent law Law Ethics Inequitable conduct United States law
152	On May 23, 2005, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s entry of judgment upon the jury verdict that Imonex infringed U.S. Patent No. 4,911,280, which related to coin selectors, and the award of $1,396,872 i Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.umaryland.edu Language: English - Date: 2005-06-07 12:04:51 Patent infringement Ecolab v. FMC United States patent law Patent law Law
153	On May 5, 2005, the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part, vacatedin-part, and remanded the district court’s judgment following a bench trial that Invitrogen falsely marked its products under 35 U.S.C. § Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.umaryland.edu Language: English - Date: 2005-05-05 15:17:28 Law Government Patent law Claim Patent
154	28 USC 291 NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscprint.html). TITLE 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART I - ORGANIZATION OF COURTS Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.cornell.edu Language: English - Date: 2013-07-17 17:58:49 Title 28 of the United States Code United States Court of Claims United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Politics of the United States United States courts of appeals United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit United States patent law
155	[removed], -1192, -1194, [removed], -1071, -1072 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Add to Reading List Source URL: www.appellate.net Language: English - Date: 2012-06-22 17:46:18 Law Patent law Global-Tech Appliances Inc. v. SEB S.A. United States patent law
156	On March 14, 2005, the Federal Circuit dismissed Pause’s appeal from the district court’s summary judgment that TiVo did not infringe U.S. Patent Reissue No. 36,801, which related to digital video recording, for lack Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.umaryland.edu Language: English - Date: 2005-03-30 13:25:19 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Appeal Mootness Law Civil procedure Lawsuits
157	On December 20, 2005, the Federal Circuit, inter alia, affirmed-in-part, reversedin-part and remanded the district court’s summary judgment that U.S. Patents No. 5,409,693 and 5,574,063, which related to skin damage pr Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.umaryland.edu Language: English - Date: 2006-02-01 18:55:53 Property law Doctrine of inherency Claim Patent Sunburn Prior art Person having ordinary skill in the art Novelty Patent law Law Civil law
158	[removed]__________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT __________________________________________________________________ ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGI Add to Reading List Source URL: www.appellate.net Language: English - Date: 2008-02-18 12:16:43 United States patent law Equal Access to Justice Act Laurence Tribe
159	On March 28, 2005, the Federal Circuit reversed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded the district court’s judgment that U.S. Patents No. 5,222,985 and No. 4,636,214, which related to the implantation of intramedullary Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.umaryland.edu Language: English - Date: 2005-03-30 13:28:55 Title 35 of the United States Code Claim United States patent law Patent law Law Person having ordinary skill in the art
160	On April 29, 2005, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s denial of Gillette’s motion for a preliminary injunction based on Energizer’s alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,212,777, whic Add to Reading List Source URL: www.law.umaryland.edu Language: English - Date: 2005-05-05 15:17:26 United States patent law Technology Patent law Safety razor Gillette Claim Razor Transitional phrase Cutting tools Depilation Shaving

UPDATE