|
| |
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.
|
| |
Federal Courts -
Federal Circuit Court of Appeals - March 27, 2007
|
| |
Black & Decker, Inc. v. Robert Bosch Tool Corp., 2007-1077,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant's appeal of order, which entered "judgment" on verdict with respect to infringement and invalidity of plaintiff's patent and denied unenforceability counterclaim, was dismissed as premature because district court, despite its post-appeal granting of a permanent injunction, had not entered a final judgment under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1295(a)(1).
|
|
| |
|
| |
Carlson v. Nicholson, 2006-7242,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because Army, in determining that veteran's drug abuse and schizophrenia were incurred in line of duty, did not determine that abuse was secondary result of mental disease, it did not resolve service connection issue and, thus, 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(m) did not bar VA from denying service connection based on voluntary drug abuse under 38 U.S.C.S. § 105.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
In re MediaTek, Inc., MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET NO. 844,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Decided , March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Petitioner did not show a clear and indisputable right to a writ of mandamus requiring the vacatur of orders, which required it to produce attorney-client communications in respondent's patent infringement action, because, regardless of petitioner's reliance on counsel's opinions, design-around attempts were relevant to a willfulness determination.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
