 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| AquaTex Indus. v. Techniche Solutions, 2006-1407,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While prosecution history estoppel, and erroneous reliance on undisclosed features, did not bar claim of infringement of patent relating to material in evaporative cooling garments based on doctrine of equivalents, no equivalence was shown since there was no particularized expert testimony addressing equivalents on limitation-by-limitation basis.
|
|||||
| Bookham, Inc. v. Unaxis Balzers AG, 2007-1027,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided , February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United States, 2006-1269,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: U.S. Court of International Trade erred in upholding Department of Commerce's ruling that foreign company and American company were not affiliated entities per 19 U.S.C.S. § 1677(33)(E). Neither § 1677(33) nor 19 C.F.R. § 351.102(b) required proof of a transfer of cash or merchandise to prove at least 5 percent of stock ownership for affiliation.
|
|||||
| Exigent Tech., Inc. v. Atrana Solutions, Inc., 2006-1487,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided , February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| FirstHealth of the Carolinas, Inc. v. CareFirst of Md., Inc., 2006-1148 (Opposition No. 91124847),
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trademark Trial and Appeal Board did not abuse its discretion when it denied appellant's motion to reopen testimony on a counterclaim for abandonment of a trademark by appellee because appellant had not provided evidence of excusable neglect particularly when the delay in presenting testimony was mostly caused by appellant or appellant's counsel.
|
|||||
| Starr v. United States Postal Serv., 2007-3105,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided , February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Winters v. OPM, 2007-3076,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided , February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
