Works matching DE "PATENT claim interpretation"
1
- Michigan Law Review, 2018, v. 117, n. 2, p. 349, doi. 10.36644/mlr.117.2.broadest
- Article
2
- Michigan Law Review, 2015, v. 113, n. 4, p. 513
- Article
3
- Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2019, v. 14, n. 10, p. 796, doi. 10.1093/jiplp/jpz111
- Gavaraskar, Kirti N;
- Kulkarni, Mohan
- Article
4
- Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2017, v. 12, n. 1, p. 23, doi. 10.1093/jiplp/jpw186
- Osgerby, Katharine;
- Stothers, Christopher
- Article
5
- Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2014, v. 9, n. 11, p. 874, doi. 10.1093/jiplp/jpu152
- Macedo, Charles R.;
- Jain, Reena;
- Wang, Victor
- Article
6
- Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2013, v. 8, n. 8, p. 578, doi. 10.1093/jiplp/jpt088
- Sharples, Andrew;
- Kendall-Palmer, Carissa
- Article
7
- University of New South Wales Law Journal, 2011, v. 34, n. 1, p. 93
- WEATHERALL, KIMBERLEE;
- ROTSTEIN, FIONA;
- DENT, CHRIS;
- CHRISTIE, ANDREW
- Article
8
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review, 2012, v. 18, n. 2, p. 481
- Article
9
- IADIS International Journal on Computer Science & Information Systems, 2016, v. 11, n. 2, p. 241
- Korobkin, Dmitriy M.;
- Fomenkov, Sergey A.;
- Kolesnikov, Sergey G.;
- Golovanchikov, lexander B.
- Article
10
- Journal of Business & Technology Law, 2011, v. 6, n. 2, p. 449
- Article
11
- Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, 2016, v. 18, n. 3, p. 563
- Article
12
- IDEA: The Intellectual Property Law Review, 2014, v. 54, n. 3, p. 479
- Article
13
- IDEA: The Intellectual Property Law Review, 2013, v. 53, n. 3, p. 351
- Article
14
- Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2020, v. 35, n. 4, p. 961, doi. 10.15779/Z38W08WH48
- Article
15
- Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2016, v. 31, p. 1169
- Article
16
- Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2016, v. 31, p. 399, doi. 10.15779/Z384R9G
- Article
17
- Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2010, v. 25, n. 4, p. 1673
- Crouch, Dennis;
- Merges, Robert P.
- Article
18
- Stanford Technology Law Review, 2010, n. 4, p. 1
- Article
19
- Cornell Law Review, 2018, v. 103, n. 3, p. 645
- Article
20
- Actualidad Jurídica (1578-956X), 2019, n. 51, p. 46
- Article
21
- Actualidad Jurídica (1578-956X), 2016, n. 42, p. 20
- Article
22
- Vanderbilt Law Review, 2017, v. 70, n. 3, p. 1071
- Article
23
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 2013, v. 32, n. 1, p. 317
- Article
24
- GRUR International: Journal of European & International IP Law, 2020, v. 69, n. 11, p. 1156, doi. 10.1093/grurint/ikaa135
- Article
25
- GRUR International: Journal of European & International IP Law, 2020, v. 69, n. 11, p. 1097, doi. 10.1093/grurint/ikaa114
- Article
26
- Penn State Law Review, 2023, v. 127, n. 2, p. 567
- Article
27
- Pace Law Review, 2021, v. 42, n. 1, p. 196
- Article
28
- Texas Law Review, 2021, v. 100, n. 1, p. 1
- Lemley, Mark A.;
- Samuelson, Pamela
- Article
29
- Texas Law Review, 2017, v. 95, n. 6, p. 1425
- Article
30
- Bench & Bar of Minnesota, 2018, v. 75, n. 4, p. 39
- Article
31
- Bench & Bar of Minnesota, 2013, v. 70, n. 9, p. 35
- Article
32
- Minnesota Law Review, 2018, v. 102, n. 3, p. 1273
- Article
33
- Brigham Young University Law Review, 2014, v. 2014, n. 5, p. 1095
- Article
34
- Touro Law Review, 2014, v. 30, n. 3, p. 591
- Article
35
- Touro Law Review, 2012, v. 28, n. 1, p. 183
- Barkume, Sharon;
- Bielski, Michael R.
- Article
36
- Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal, 2016, v. 24, n. 3, p. 301
- Article
37
- Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal, 2011, v. 19, n. 3, p. 361
- Article
38
- American Economic Review, 2016, v. 106, n. 5, p. 193, doi. 10.1257/aer.p20161093
- Article
39
- Nature Biotechnology, 2012, v. 30, n. 8, p. 758, doi. 10.1038/nbt.2318
- Haanes, Elizabeth J;
- Cànaves, Jaume M
- Article
40
- George Mason Law Review, 2012, v. 19, n. 2, p. 471
- Article
41
- Indiana Law Review, 2017, v. 50, n. 4, p. 1281, doi. 10.18060/4806.1170
- CARTER, R. TREVOR;
- MORTON, TRENTON B.;
- DODGE, REID E.
- Article
42
- Boston College Law Review, 2015, v. 56, n. 3, p. 949
- Article
43
- Northwestern University Law Review, 2013, v. 108, n. 1, p. 1
- Anderson, J. Jonas;
- Menell, Peter S.
- Article
44
- SMU Law Review, 2020, v. 73, n. 3, p. 541
- Article
45
- Texas Tech Law Review, 2022, v. 54, n. 2, p. 255
- Sean Tu;
- Amy Cyphert;
- Sam Perl
- Article
46
- Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 2020, v. 28, n. 1, p. 187
- Article
47
- University of New Hampshire Law Review, 2012, v. 10, n. 1, p. 163
- Article
48
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review, 2012, v. 34, n. 2, p. 421
- Article
49
- Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 2018, v. 32, n. 1, p. 1
- Article
50
- Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 2013, v. 27, n. 1, p. 279
- Article