Documents

Oral argument — DISTRIBUTED SOLUTIONS, INC. v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Mar 6, 2013

So even if it applies, I'm having a hard time understanding how it applies to this case to demonstrate that the government acted arbitrarily. Understood, Your Honor. And in this case... … In fact, you've been serving this agency for some period of time, your client. More than 10 years. More than 10 years. Providing essentially similar type services. Yes, Your Honor.

Oral argument — AmGen v. F Hoffman-La Roche

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 8, 2008

And so what he is waiting for this court to do is to act, either to affirm the preliminary injunction or to remand the matter because this appeal is now moved. … Would you object to an expedited briefing period? On an expedited? It depends upon what issues.

Oral argument — GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 4, 2019

We've got two periods here, the partial label period and the full label period. Dr. McCullough testified that he hadn't read Teva's partial label. … To use the words of the Patent Act. The act of infringement is practicing steps of the method. So there is not an infringing sale.

Oral argument — Rothe Development v. Defense

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 2, 2008

The motion is granted and I just comment that probably no one better knows the qualifications of a young lawyer than the judge with whom they are working. … I don't think I pulled it out of the air, so I think that I did pull it from one of the cases.

Oral argument — GoTV Streaming, LLC v. Netflix, Inc.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 8, 2025

That brings to mind just another side question, and we'll ask both sides to comment on this, this is just more housekeeping, but there are pending IPRs. There are. … So the city of Pomona wasn't a clean case where the appellate court was dealing with just a flat, no explanation, no attempt to say, I'm reserving, I'm rethinking about it.

Oral argument — Meenaxi Enterprise, Inc. v. The Coca-Cola Company

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 2, 2022

So it seems to me there was a four-period time between the registration of the marks to the filing, the cancellation of the marks, four-year period. I believe that's correct, Your Honor. … This is a misrepresentation claim made under Section 1064 of the Lanham Act.

Oral argument — Davis v. Navy

Oral argument · Oral argument · Aug 1, 2016

And disrespectful comments was part of it, I guess, part of the specifications. Disrespectful comments to... Well, we have to distinguish... … This was his fifth disciplinary action within the period of one year.

Oral argument — Polyethylene Retail Carrier v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Apr 3, 2007

explanation where you have essentially a commodity product where, you know, you look in the Wall Street Journal you know what the world market price of this stuff is and that's when you see a disparity of acts … Jones three minutes Thank you Your Honor Going back to your comment There is statutory support for a heightened level of scrutiny The statute requires Commerce to use quote best information available to

Oral argument — OK'S CASCADE COMPANY v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Apr 4, 2012

Well, the government can't act in an arbitrary manner with respect to any particular party. … In terms of, yes, maybe for this particular period of time, OK's was compensated a bit more than it would have been had its contract rates been applied for that particular period, but I have two responses

Oral argument — Dixon Ticonderoga v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Aug 8, 2006

Well, I have to confess I did not take into account the Debt Collection Act, so I haven't thought about its impact on my argument. It supports your argument. … How does that two-week time period hurt your company?

Oral argument — FORD MOTOR CO v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 8, 2012

Well, we do have affidavits saying that Ford acted with great care and consistency in making its HMT payments. And I don't think that that's been disputed by the government. But that may be. … They also said in the comments accompanying the regulation that this regulation was not imposing additional burdens on exporters. That was at page 31950 of the Federal Register 67.

Oral argument — NORMAN G JENSEN INC v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Apr 2, 2012

And contract, federal contract claims, are deemed denied if the contracting officer doesn't act within the next period of time. Believe me, it happens over and over and over again. … , period.

Oral argument — CREWZERS FIRE CREW TRANSPORT v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 6, 2013

Can you comment on that? Yes, Your Honor. In the Locke case, it's distinguishable from the case at issue here, because that was a requirements contract. … Are those periods during the three-year period when we were unlawfully suspended? That's on A-243.

Oral argument — Wiley v. MSPB

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 9, 2009

If, as you suggest, this goes back to OPM and they don't act on it, well, then we're getting into the situation where there has been repeated requests for a decision without answer. … And if that's the policy of OPM, I think it should be made publicly known through Federal Register notice and rulemaking and opportunity comment.

Oral argument — Genentech, Inc. v. Amgen Inc.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Mar 3, 2020

Can you explain to me the comment you just made? Sure. I don't understand what is perverse about the position you made. … From the moment somebody files their biosimilar application, that's an artificial act of infringement.

Oral argument — McKesson Info v. Bridge Medical

Oral argument · Oral argument · Mar 9, 2007

And I want to comment a few points on some of the Court's questions so far. … But when a patentee knows or should know that matter is material, that is a different act. It's not the act of withholding the reference.

Oral argument — Gray v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 5, 2017

in Haas was thinking the line was miles offshore, but again, the description of the potential over- and under-inclusiveness in Haas was referring to someone in a boat directly off the coast for a long period … We did say that they violated the Administrative Procedures Act by failing to publish notice and comment. What page is that on? 26. What? 26. 26 of Mr. Gray's brief. Right.

Oral argument — Blue Water Navy Vietnam Vets. v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 5, 2017

We did say that they violated the Administrative Procedures Act by failing to publish notice and comment. What page is that on? 26. What? 26. 26 of Mr. Gray's brief. Right. … If it's a congressional act and it's subject to an offset of other veterans' benefits under the Pay As You Go Act of 2010. That's if it was a separate statutory provision. Yes, ma'am. Okay.

Oral argument — ATI Technologies ULC v. Matal

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 13, 2017

The argued case this afternoon is Number 16-22-22, ATI Technologies against Matal as acting director. Mr. Farrancroft. May it please the Court. … And the point is the diligence period, one can measure it by that six-month period that I just mentioned coming from ATI itself.

Oral argument — Pixton v. B&B Plastics

Oral argument · Oral argument · Apr 7, 2010

There are no comments. What about page 121B and 122 as to Bringer? He says the question was, was Russ Bringer involved in GAMOR day-to-day? And the answer to that is most assuredly. … The problem with all that is that it relates to the period in which they were producing this under license, rather than the period afterwards.