vimarsana.com

Page 373 - ஒன்றுபட்டது மாநிலங்களில் மாவட்டம் நீதிமன்றம் News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

ATER INVESTOR ALERT: Bernstein Liebhard LLP Announces that a Securities Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Aterian, Inc

Share this article Share this article NEW YORK, May 14, 2021 /PRNewswire/  Bernstein Liebhard, a nationally acclaimed investor rights law firm, announces that a securities class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or acquired the securities of Aterian, Inc. ( Aterian or the Company ) (NASDAQ: ATER) from December 1, 2020 through May 3, 2021 (the Class Period ). The lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York alleges violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. If you  purchased Aterian securities, and/or would like to discuss your legal rights and options please visit Aterian Shareholder Class Action Lawsuit or contact Joseph R. Seidman, Jr. toll free at 

United States v Ellis

United States v. Ellis Along with the ACLU of Pennsylvania, we filed an amicus brief in the United States District Court for Western Pennsylvania explaining that secret forensic technology is inconsistent with criminal defendants’ constitutional rights and the public’s right to oversee the criminal trial process. We also explain why source code, and other aspects of forensic software programs used in a criminal prosecution, must be disclosed in order to ensure that innocent people do not end up behind bars, or worse on death row. Related Content

Free Stream Gets Caught in the Section 101 Sandbox | Knobbe Martens

Before Judges Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Summary: Patent claims were directed to an abstract idea where the claims failed to recite any structure or concrete actions for achieving the claimed advance and the claimed advance did not the improve the operability of computing devices. Free Stream Media Corp. sued Alphonso Inc. for patent infringement. Alphonso filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that certain asserted claims are patent ineligible under § 101 because they are directed to the abstract idea of tailored advertising. Free Stream disagreed, characterizing the claims as directed to a specific improvement, namely delivering relevant content (e.g., targeted advertising) from one device to a second device through a “security sandbox,” a security mechanism constraining the actions that applications on a device may take. The district court rejected Alphonso’s argument and denied its motion to di

© 2025 Vimarsana

vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.