Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 20.03 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 20.03 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 20.03

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title IV
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Chapter 20
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 20.03
20.03 Definitions.To provide uniform nomenclature throughout the structure of the executive branch, the following definitions apply:
(1) “Agency,” as the context requires, means an official, officer, commission, authority, council, committee, department, division, bureau, board, section, or another unit or entity of government.
(2) “Board of trustees,” except with reference to the board created in chapter 253, means a board created by specific statutory enactment and appointed to function adjunctively to a department, the Governor, or the Executive Office of the Governor to administer public property or a public program.
(3) “Cabinet” means collectively the Attorney General, the Chief Financial Officer, and the Commissioner of Agriculture, as specified in s. 4, Art. IV of the State Constitution.
(4) “Commission,” unless otherwise required by the State Constitution, means a body created by specific statutory enactment within a department, the office of the Governor, or the Executive Office of the Governor and exercising limited quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial powers, or both, independently of the head of the department or the Governor.
(5) “Committee” or “task force” means an advisory body created without specific statutory enactment for a time not to exceed 1 year or created by specific statutory enactment for a time not to exceed 3 years and appointed to study a specific problem and recommend a solution or policy alternative with respect to that problem. Its existence terminates upon the completion of its assignment.
(6) “Coordinating council” means an interdepartmental advisory body created by law to coordinate programs and activities for which one department has primary responsibility but in which one or more other departments have an interest.
(7) “Council” or “advisory council” means an advisory body created by specific statutory enactment and appointed to function on a continuing basis for the study of the problems arising in a specified functional or program area of state government and to provide recommendations and policy alternatives.
(8) “Department” means the principal administrative unit within the executive branch of state government.
(9) “Examining and licensing board” means a board authorized to grant and revoke licenses to engage in regulated occupations.
(10) “Executive director” means the chief administrative employee or officer of a department headed by a board or by the Governor and the Cabinet.
(11) “Head of the department” means the individual under whom or the board under which direct administration of the department is placed by statute. Where direct administration of a department is placed under an officer or board appointed by and serving at the pleasure of the Governor, that officer or board remains subject to the Governor’s supervision and direction.
(12) “Secretary” means an individual who is appointed by the Governor to head a department and who is not otherwise named in the State Constitution.
(13) “To serve at the pleasure” means the appointee serves in the office until removed by the appointing authority. Consistent with the allotment of executive authority under ss. 1 and 6, Art. IV of the State Constitution, an appointee serving at the pleasure of the appointing authority generally remains subject to the direction and supervision of the appointing authority.
History.s. 3, ch. 69-106; s. 2, ch. 82-46; s. 5, ch. 83-217; s. 2, ch. 94-235; s. 3, ch. 2000-258; s. 5, ch. 2012-116; s. 8, ch. 2023-8.

F.S. 20.03 on Google Scholar

F.S. 20.03 on Casetext

Amendments to 20.03


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 20.03
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 20.03.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE, LLC, v. ACRES OF LAND, OWNED BY SANDRA TOWNES POWELL, No. MVP No. VA- MO- M. No. MVP No. VA- MO- M. No. MVP No. VA- MO- M. No. MVP No. VA- FR- AR FR- LLC, v. D. POA ID No. An a WV B. POA N. ID No. An a WV, LLC, v. No. MVP No. VA- GI- S. K. No. MVP No. VA- FR- AR FR- V. Sr. V. II, No. MVP No. VA- GI- V. Sr. V. II, No. MVP VA- GI- B. W. No. MVP No. VA- GI- No. MVP No. VA- GI- C. R. No. A- A- MVP No. VA- CR- W. No. A- MVP No. VA- CR- No. MVP No. VA- MO- AR- MN- No. MVP No. VA- MO- AR MN- W. W. No. MVP No. BVA- FR- No. MVP No. VA- FR- S. K. No. MVP No. VA- FR- M. K. No. MVP No. VA- FR- a No. MVP No. VA- GI- LLC, v. L. No. B MVP No. VA- GI- No. MVP No. VA- RO- A. No. MVP No. VA- FR- G. L. No. MVP No. VA- FR- M. M. No. MVP No. VA- FR- No. A- MVP No. VA- CR- W. D. No. A- MVP No. VA- CR- No. A- MVP No. VA- CR- W. W. No. MVP No. BVMO- A. P. No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- MO- W. W. No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- MO- AR- MN- W. G. No. MVP No. VA- RO- No. MVP No. VA- RO- A. No. MVP No. VA- FR- E. K. No. MVP No. VA- FR- M. No. MVP No. VA- FR- E. A. E. A. No. MVP No. VA- FR- E. A. E. A. No. MVP No. VA- FR- B. No. MVP No. VA- FR- R. B. No. MVP No. VA- FR- No. MVP No. VA- FR- LLC, No. MVP No. VA- FR- AR FR- a k a D. No. MVP No. VA- FR- AR FR- D. No. MVP No. VA- FR- AR FR- B. B. R. No. MVP No. VA- FR- AR FR- L. C. No. MVP No. VA- FR- W. No. MVP No. VA- FR- B. Sr. E. No. MVP No. VA- FR- A. No. MVP No. VA- FR- No. MVP No. VA- FR- Jr. No. MVP No. VA- FR- Jr. No. MVP No. VA- FR- Jr. No. MVP No. VA- FR- LLC, v. No. MVP No. VA- GI- No MVP No. BVGI- f k a No. MVP No. VA- GI- s No. MVP No VA- GI- No. MVP No. VA- GI- D. J. No. MVP No. VA- GI- No. MVP No. VA- GI- LLC, No. MVP No. VA- GI- LLC, No. A. MVP No. VA- GI- No. MVP No. VA- GI- No. MVP No. VA- MO- W. No. MVP No. BVRO- D. B. No. MVP No. VA- RO- AR RO- D. B. No. MVP No. VA- RO- D. B. No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- T. E. No. MVP No. VA- RO- T. E. No MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- No. MVP No. VA- FR- No. MVP No. VA- FR- D. B. No. MVP No. VA- RO- LLC, v. A. No. MVP No. VA- RO- S. R. F. L. M. A, a k a a k a I. a k a a k a M. a k a H. Co. No. MVP No. VA- RO- B. A. No. MVP No. VA- FR- No. MVP No. VA- GI- No. MVP No. VA- MN- AR MN- C. D. No. MVP No. VA- MN- AR MN- D. M. No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- MO- S. R. F. L. M. a k a a k a I. a k a I. Co. No. MVP No. VA- MO- W. B. No. MVP No. VA- MO- M. No. MVP No. VA- MO- M. No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- MO- C. D. No. MVP No. VA- MO- D. D. No. MVP No. BVRO- M. E. No. MVP No. BVRO- III, No. MVP No. VA- RO- H. Jr. III, a k a No. MVP No. VA- RO- No. MVP No. VA- RO- J. No. MVP No. VA- RO- a k a No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- No. MVP No. VA- RO- M. W. No. MVP No. VA- RO- G. A. No. MVP No. VA- RO- H. Jr. III, H. Sr. No. MVP No. VA- RO- AR RO- J. No. MVP No. VA- RO- No. MVP No. VA- RO- AR RO- B. R. No. MVP No. VA- RO- AR RO- a k a No. MVP No. VA- RO- ATWS- No. MVP No. VA- RO- W. I. No. MVP No. VA- RO- A. No. MVP No. VA- RO- E. L. L. Jr. S. No. MVP No. VA- FR- BYL. Jr. S. E. L. No. MVP No. VA- FR- A. J. No. MVP No. VA- GI- I. No. MVP No. VA- FR- H. No. MVP No. VA- FR- J. B. No. MVP No. VA- FR- W. S. No. MVP No. VA- FR- K. No. MVP No. VA- FR- K. No. MVP No. VA- FR- No. MVP No. VA- FR- K. No. MVP No. VA- FR- No. MVP No. VA- FR- ATWS- R. Jr. No. MVP No. VA- FR- E. D. No. MVP No. VA- FR- O. Jr. A. No. MVP No. VA- PI- M. M. a k a MVP No. VA- PI- No. MVP No. VA- MO- No. MVP No. VA- RO- LLC, v. L. ID No. N. ID No. ID No. A. ID No. D. ID No. F. ID No. M. ID No. ID No. Jr. ID No. ID No. ID No. ID No. ID No. J. ID No., 915 F.3d 197 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Cunningham, Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel No. 063.00-01-20.03-0000 and being MVP Parcel No. . . .

QINGDAO QIHANG TYRE CO. LTD. v. UNITED STATES,, 352 F. Supp. 3d 1345 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2018)

. . . calculated for Qihang and Xugong, the Department recalculated that margin in the Remand Redetermination to 20.03% . . .

ULTRATEC, INC. v. SORENSON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. LLC,, 323 F. Supp. 3d 1071 (W.D. Wis. 2018)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4][a][v] (Matthew Bender). . . .

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF UNITED STATES v. CITY OF SEATTLE,, 274 F. Supp. 3d 1155 (W.D. Wash. 2017)

. . . Port of Seattle, 115 Wash.App. 695, 698 n.3, 63 P.3d 830 (20.03). . . . .

MULHALL, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., 241 F. Supp. 3d 1046 (N.D. Cal. 2017)

. . . Clock Inc., 349 F.3d 1191, 1199-200 (9th Cir. 20.03). . . .

PRISM TECHNOLOGIES LLC, v. SPRINT SPECTRUM L. P. PCS,, 849 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2017)

. . . See Robert Bosch, 719 F.3d at 1311; Uniloc, 632 F.3d at 1312; Chisum, supra, §§ 20.03[3], 20.07. . . .

HITKANSUT LLC, v. UNITED STATES,, 130 Fed. Cl. 353 (Fed. Cl. 2017)

. . . See Brunswick, 36 Fed.Cl. at 219 n.4; see also Chisum § 20.03[4][a][v]. . . .

L. SMITH, v. ARCHULETA,, 658 F. App'x 422 (10th Cir. 2016)

. . . BACKGROUND On May 15, 20.03, a jury convicted Smith of first-degree murder, two counts of attempted first-degree . . .

HALO ELECTRONICS, INC. v. PULSE ELECTRONICS, INC., 136 S. Ct. 1923 (U.S. 2016)

. . . See generally 7 Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4][b][iii], pp. 20-343 to 20-344 (2011). . . .

OHIO VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION, v. FOLA COAL COMPANY, LLC,, 120 F. Supp. 3d 509 (S.D.W. Va. 2015)

. . . Swan identified a WVSCI score of 41.81 and a GLIMPSS score of 20.03. Pis.’ . . .

PANDORA MEDIA, INC. v. AMERICAN SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS AND PUBLISHERS, ATV LLC, EMI, 785 F.3d 73 (2d Cir. 2015)

. . . Danbury Hosp., 347 F.3d 419, 424 (2d Cir.20.03) (“A court may not replace the terms of a consent decree . . .

McCLELLAN, v. I- FLOW CORPORATION, a DJO, L. L. C. a DJO a a v. I- A DJO, L. L. C. a DJO a a, 776 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2015)

. . . Oregon Uniform Civil Jury Instruction 20.03. . Oregon Uniform Civil Jury Instruction 20.04. . . . .

LIBERTY AMMUNITION, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 119 Fed. Cl. 368 (Fed. Cl. 2014)

. . . See Brunswick, 36 Fed.Cl. at 219 n. 4; see also Chisum § 20.03[4][a][v] 20-316 to 24. . . .

UNITED STATES v. DISH NETWORK LLC,, 75 F. Supp. 3d 916 (C.D. Ill. 2014)

. . . The PossibleNOW analysis also found that: 1.The sample of the 5000 calls from the Dish 20.03-2007 records . . .

GORDON, v. NEUGEBAUER,, 57 F. Supp. 3d 766 (N.D. Tex. 2014)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03, which criminalizes kidnapping—a state law crime that is considered a predicate act . . . Penal Code § 20.03. . . . Penal Code Ann. § 20.03(a). . . . The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held that an abduction occurs under § 20.03 where a person is . . . Penal Code § 20.03(a). . . .

QUINTAN- ILLA, v. UNITED STATES v., 582 F. App'x 412 (5th Cir. 2014)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03 (prohibiting abduction of another person); Tex. . . .

In COLEMAN, v., 768 F.3d 367 (5th Cir. 2014)

. . . Penal Code §§ 20.01(2), 20.03(a)). . Coleman v. State, AP-75478, 2009 WL 4696064 (Tex.Crim.App. . . .

ULTRATEC, INC. v. SORENSON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. LLC,, 45 F. Supp. 3d 881 (W.D. Wis. 2014)

. . . Chisum, Chi-sum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][v] (2002) (“A plaintiff who seeks to recover for damages for . . .

In INOFIN INCORPORATED, G. v. C., 512 B.R. 19 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2014)

. . . violation of Massachusetts General Laws chapter 255B, section 2 and the Division's regulations 209 CMR 20.03 . . .

TOSHIBA CORPORATION, v. IMATION CORP., 990 F. Supp. 2d 882 (W.D. Wis. 2013)

. . . Chisum, Chi-sum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][v] (2002) (“A plaintiff who seeks to recover for damages for . . .

In ERBSCHLOE, v. U. S., 502 B.R. 470 (Bankr. W.D. Va. 2013)

. . . that the Debtor paid New River Nissan approximately $260.38 on vehicle maintenance or approximately $20.03 . . .

COLEMAN, v. THALER, Of, 716 F.3d 895 (5th Cir. 2013)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03(a) (providing that "[a] person commits [kidnapping] if he intentionally or knowingly . . .

MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, v. JOHN DOES, 291 F.R.D. 191 (N.D. Ill. 2013)

. . . Moore, et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 20.03 (3d ed. 1999)). . . . .

UNITED STATES v. ARRELLANO- LOPEZ,, 518 F. App'x 294 (5th Cir. 2013)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03(a) was not a conviction for a crime of violence because Tex. . . . Penal Code § 20.03(a) does not have as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of force . . . Penal Code § 20.03(a) does not comport with the contemporary, generic offense of kidnapping. . . . Penal Code § 20.03(a) was not plain error. . . .

In ENERGY CONVERSION DEVICES, INC., 483 B.R. 119 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2012)

. . . Bank cited sections 8.01, 10.01, 11.01, 20.03, and 21.01 of the Lease. . . .

PATRICK COLLINS, INC. v. JOHN DOES, 282 F.R.D. 161 (E.D. Mich. 2012)

. . . plaintiff knows one of the defendants is liable, but does not know which one. 4 Moore's Federal Practice § 20.03 . . .

UNITED STATES a a Nu a v. CITY OF NEW YORK, A, 847 F. Supp. 2d 395 (E.D.N.Y. 2012)

. . . 68 black firefighters from list 7029 were delayed in their start dates, leading to a total loss of 20.03 . . .

WHILEY, v. SCOTT,, 79 So. 3d 702 (Fla. 2011)

. . . "Department” is the principal administrative unit of or within the executive branch, §§ 20.03(2) and . . . (1), and "the individual or board in charge of the department” is the "[h]ead of the department.” § 20.03 . . .

JOHNSON, v. AUSTAL, U. S. A. L. L. C., 805 F. Supp. 2d 1299 (S.D. Ala. 2011)

. . . from $17.50/hour to $18.03/hour — “cost of living adjustment ]”); March 9, 2009 (from $18.03/hour to $20.03 . . . had the following decrease in pay: December 4, 2006 (from $14/hour to $12/hour); May 4, 2009 (from $20.03 . . .

POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC. v. FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC., 762 F. Supp. 2d 710 (D. Del. 2011)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4][b][vi] (1990) (stating that amount of increase in damages awarded . . .

C. KYHN, v. K. SHINSEKI,, 24 Vet. App. 228 (Vet. App. 2011)

. . . VI, ch. 20.03. . . .

L. BRINKMEIER, v. BIC CORPORATION BIC USA L. v. LLC., 733 F. Supp. 2d 552 (D. Del. 2010)

. . . Chisum, Chi-sum on Patents, § 20.03[7][c][vii], at 20-656 (2002). . . .

A. HOLLANDER, v. ETYMOTIC RESEARCH, INC., 726 F. Supp. 2d 543 (E.D. Pa. 2010)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03 (2010) (“[A] strong case can be made for finding culpable mismarking . . . Chisum, Chi-sum on Patents § 20.03 (2010) (“[A] strong case can be made for finding culpable mismarking . . .

CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO, a AURORA WATER, d b a a v. PS SYSTEMS, INC. a RAR LLC, a, 720 F. Supp. 2d 1243 (D. Colo. 2010)

. . . Hoist & Derrick Co., 895 F.2d 1403, 1406 (Fed.Cir.1990) (citing 5 Chisum on Patents § 20.03[3], at 20 . . .

L. BRINKMEIER, v. GRACO CHILDREN S PRODUCTS INC., 684 F. Supp. 2d 548 (D. Del. 2010)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][vii]. . . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][iii]. . . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][vii]. . . .

FOREST GROUP, INC. v. BON TOOL COMPANY, Co., 590 F.3d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2009)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][vii] (200.9). . . .

SPECTRALYTICS, INC. v. CORDIS CORPORATION, 650 F. Supp. 2d 900 (D. Minn. 2009)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[l][e] (1999 & Supp.2005). . . .

SMITH, v. COLUMBIA GAS OF OHIO GROUP MEDICAL BENEFIT PLAN,, 624 F. Supp. 2d 844 (S.D. Ohio 2009)

. . . (Medical Plan at Section 20.03). The other Welfare Plans contain the same or similar provisions. . . . constructions and decisions shall be conclusive for all purposes of the Plan[J (Medical Plan at Section 20.03 . . .

FORT WORTH EMPLOYERS RETIREMENT FUND, v. BIOVAIL CORPORATION,, 615 F. Supp. 2d 218 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . The Amended Complaint alleges that Biovail’s stock price dropped from $25.51 per share to $20.03 per . . .

THE BOEING COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES,, 86 Fed. Cl. 303 (Fed. Cl. 2009)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[3][b][i] (2005) (citing additional cases). . . . Chisum, supra, at § 20.03[3][b][vi]; see also Fonar Corp. v. . . . Flakt, Inc., 954 F.Supp. 796, 808 (D.Del.1996); see also Chisum, supra, at § 20.03[4][a][v]. . . . England Printing & Lithographing Co., 899 F.2d 1171, 1175-76 (Fed.Cir.1990) (same); Chisum, supra, at § 20.03 . . . considered and declined to embrace the government's proposed taxation plan”); see also Chisum, supra, at § 20.03 . . .

UNITED STATES v. MORENO- FLOREAN,, 542 F.3d 445 (5th Cir. 2008)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03(a) qualified). . . .

MEGAS, v. QUARTERMAN,, 281 F. App'x 330 (5th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 20.03. “ Abduct’ means to restrain a person with intent to prevent [her] liberation by ... secreting . . .

A. PEQUIGNOT, v. SOLO CUP COMPANY,, 540 F. Supp. 2d 649 (E.D. Va. 2008)

. . . Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][vii], at 20-657 (2002) ("There is little authority on whether continued . . . patents was readily apparent to anyone familiar with the legal term of a patent,” Chisum on Patents § 20.03 . . .

ADIDAS- AMERICA, INC. AG, v. PAYLESS SHOESOURCE, INC., 546 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (D. Or. 2008)

. . . Chiron, 268 F.Supp.2d at 1121 (citing Comark, 156 F.3d at 1191; 7 Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4 . . .

ADIDAS AMERICA, INC. AG, v. PAYLESS SHOESOURCE, INC., 529 F. Supp. 2d 1215 (D. Or. 2007)

. . . Chiron, 268 F.Supp.2d at 1121 (citing Comark, 156 F.3d at 1191; 7 Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CERVANTES- BLANCO,, 504 F.3d 576 (5th Cir. 2007)

. . . Garcia-Gonzalez, 168 Fed.Appx. 564, this court held that Texas’s kidnapping statute, Texas Penal Code § 20.03 . . . Under Texas Penal Code § 20.03(a), a person commits the offense of kidnapping if he “intentionally or . . .

BERKLEY, v. QUARTERMAN,, 507 F. Supp. 2d 692 (W.D. Tex. 2007)

. . . . §§ 20.01(2) & 20.03(a) (Vernon 2003). . . .

In SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY, LLC,, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4][b][iii] (2002). . . . an award of enhanced'damages pursuant to section 284 requires a finding of willfulness. 7 Chisum § 20.03 . . . to increase is triggered only when the infringer’s conduct warrants an exemplary award.” 7 Chisum § 20.03 . . .

MANNS, v. QUARTERMAN,, 236 F. App'x 908 (5th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 20.03(a) (kidnaping); Id. § 29.02(a) (robbery); Id. § 22.021(a) (aggravated sexual assault). . . .

MARS, INC. v. COIN ACCEPTORS, INC., 513 F. Supp. 2d 128 (D.N.J. 2007)

. . . Nicolet Instrument Corp., 807 F.2d 964, 969 (Fed.Cir.1986) (quoting Chisum, Patents § 20.03[4] at 20- . . . See Chisum, Patents, § 20.03 at 325-26 (citing cases). . . . See Chisum, Patents, § 20.03 at 325-26 & n. 75 (citing cases). . . .

UNITED STATES v. INIGUEZ- BARBA,, 485 F.3d 790 (5th Cir. 2007)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03, which is almost identical to New York’s and doesn’t require a risk of injury or involuntary . . .

TRANSCLEAN CORPORATION, P. A. E. v. JIFFY LUBE INTERNATIONAL, INC. s s R. Co. s, 474 F.3d 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2007)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][b][iii] (2002). . . .

FUJI PHOTO FILM CO. LTD. v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, v., 474 F.3d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 2007)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][b][iii] (2005). . . .

BREWER, v. QUARTERMAN,, 475 F.3d 253 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03(a). . . .

INLINE CONNECTION CORPORATION, LLC, LLC, v. AOL TIME WARNER INCORPORATED, LLC, LLC, v., 465 F. Supp. 2d 312 (D. Del. 2006)

. . . In support of its position, Inline relies on § 20.03[7][c][i] of Chisum on Patents, which states, “[t . . . Inline referred this court to § 20.03[7][c][i] of Chisum on Patents, which states in relevant part that . . .

DP WAGNER MANUFACTURING INC. v. PRO PATCH SYSTEMS, INC. a k a, 434 F. Supp. 2d 445 (S.D. Tex. 2006)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents, § 20.03[7][c][vii], at 20-656 (2002) (“Section 292 requires as an element . . . See Chisum on Patents, § 20.03[7][c][vii], at 20-657 ("There is little authority on whether continued . . .

GLENAYRE ELECTRONICS, INC. v. JACKSON PMJ, 443 F.3d 851 (Fed. Cir. 2006)

. . . Chi-sum, Ckisum on Patents § 20.03[7][b][iv] (2001) (“In many instances the appropriate measure of monetary . . .

UNITED STATES v. GARCIA- GONZALEZ,, 168 F. App'x 564 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . Penal Code § 20.03(a)(2005). . . .

In BAYSIDE PRISON LITIGATION,, 157 F. App'x 545 (3d Cir. 2005)

. . . to present the same evidence twice in separate trials.” 20 Moore’s Federal Practice and Procedure § 20.03 . . .

NEVILLE, v. DRETKE,, 423 F.3d 474 (5th Cir. 2005)

. . . PeNal Code § 20.03. . . .

BELMONTES, Jr. v. L. BROWN,, 414 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir. 2005)

. . . PREAMBLE On July 15, 20.03, we filed an opinion in this case holding that there is a reasonable probability . . .

FMC CORPORATION, v. CONTROL SOLUTIONS, INC., 369 F. Supp. 2d 539 (E.D. Pa. 2005)

. . . See 7 Chisum ON Patents § 20.03[7][c]. . . . Id at § 20.03[7][c][vii]. . . . ChisuM on Patents § 20.03[7][e][vii]. . . .

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC. v. UNIVERSAL AVIONICS SYSTEMS CORP., 347 F. Supp. 2d 124 (D. Del. 2004)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03 (Matthew Bender & Co. 2002) (“Lost profits, in the form of sales diversion . . .

ESSLING S HOMES PLUS, INC. A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, d b a v. CITY OF SAINT PAUL, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION,, 356 F. Supp. 2d 971 (D. Minn. 2004)

. . . On October 16, 20.03, the Minnesota DHS mailed a violation letter placing Plaintiffs’ licenses on conditional . . .

ENGINEERED PRODUCTS CO. v. DONALDSON COMPANY, INC., 335 F. Supp. 2d 973 (N.D. Iowa 2004)

. . . See EPC’s Reply Brief at 8 (citing CHISUM ON PATENTS, § 20.03[4][c][vii] and cases cited therein). . . .

SHARPER IMAGE CORP. a v. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC. a v. a, 222 F.R.D. 621 (N.D. Cal. 2004)

. . . See also the many articles cited in note 312 (page 20-419) of section 20.03[4][b] of Vol. 7 of Chisum . . .

HIIBEL v. SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF NEVADA, HUMBOLDT COUNTY,, 542 U.S. 177 (U.S. 2004)

. . . . § 171.123(1) (20.03). §171.123(3). . . .

TRISTRATA TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. ICN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., 314 F. Supp. 2d 356 (D. Del. 2004)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents, § 20.03[4][c][ii] (1999)). . . .

NCUBE CORPORATION, v. SEACHANGE INTERNATIONAL, INC., 313 F. Supp. 2d 361 (D. Del. 2004)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents, § 20.03[4][c][ii] (1999). . . .

UNITED STATES v. I. GUZMAN,, 91 F. App'x 967 (5th Cir. 2004)

. . . Penal Code §§ 20.01(1); 20.03. . . .

ZOLTEK CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES,, 58 Fed. Cl. 688 (Fed. Cl. 2003)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents, § 20.03(6), at 20-449-459 (1998). . DowChem. Co. v. . . .

FORMER EMPLOYEES OF AMERIPHONE, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 288 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2003)

. . . for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974”); 68 Fed.Reg. 53,399 (Sept. 10, 20.03 . . .

DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, v. MEE INDUSTRIES, INC., 341 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2003)

. . . (citing 5 Chi-sum on Patents § 20.03[3], at 20-142 (1986)). . . .

BRUNO INDEPENDENT LIVING AIDS, INC. v. ACORN MOBILITY SERVICES LTD. ACORN STAIRLIFTS, INC., 277 F. Supp. 2d 965 (W.D. Wis. 2003)

. . . referring to “failure to disclose” as a “form of inequitable conduct”); see also 1 Chisum on Patents § 20.03 . . .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. BARRERA- MARTINEZ, 274 F. Supp. 2d 950 (N.D. Ill. 2003)

. . . juries that he was on the apron when he first observed Montes, but he later testified at the June 26, 20.03 . . .

LOPEZ, v. HEINAUER,, 332 F.3d 507 (8th Cir. 2003)

. . . of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit at the close of business on March 31, 20.03 . . .

NTP, INC. v. RESEARCH IN MOTION, LTD., 270 F. Supp. 2d 751 (E.D. Va. 2003)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4][a][v] (2002). . . .

ROCKET JEWELRY BOX, INC. v. QUALITY INTERNATIONAL PACKAGING, LTD., 250 F. Supp. 2d 333 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Chisum, 5 Patents § 20.03[5]. . . .

FUJI PHOTO FILM CO. LTD. v. JAZZ PHOTO CORP., 249 F. Supp. 2d 434 (D.N.J. 2003)

. . . See State Industries, 883 F.2d at 1578; 7 Chisum on Patents § 20.03[1]. . . .

GENLYTE THOMAS GROUP LLC v. NATIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC., 262 F. Supp. 2d 753 (W.D. Ky. 2003)

. . . See also, 7 Chisum on Patents § 20.03[7][c][iii] (“The courts have approved the common practice of listing . . .

CHIRON CORPORATION, v. GENENTECH, INC., 268 F. Supp. 2d 1117 (E.D. Cal. 2002)

. . . Id. at 1190-93; 7 Chisum, Chi-sum on Patents § 20.03[4][b][v][D], at 20-368 to 20-374 (2002). . . .

APPLERA CORPORATION, MDS MDS v. MICROMASS UK LTD., 204 F. Supp. 2d 724 (D. Del. 2002)

. . . only an improvement on or a small part of the product sold by the infringer.” 7 Chisum on Patents, § 20.03 . . .

OMNIGLOW CORPORATION, v. UNIQUE INDUSTRIES, INC., 184 F. Supp. 2d 105 (D. Mass. 2002)

. . . now seek recovery, in the form of an injunction, from buyers of the products); 5 Chisum, Patents § 20.03 . . . Calco Ltd., 850 F.2d 660, 668 (Fed.Cir.1988); see also 5 Chisum, Patents § 20.03[7][b][iii] (2001) (“ . . . See generally Aro Mfg., 377 U.S. at 501, 513, 84 S.Ct. 1526; see also, 5 Chisum, Patents § 20.03[7][b . . . the liability of other infringers and may trigger the full compensation rule.” 5 Chisum, Patents § 20.03 . . . Corp., 56 F.3d at 1538; see also Aro Mfg., 377 U.S. at 501, 513, 84 S.Ct. 1526; 5 Chisum, Patents § 20.03 . . .

HOCKERSON- HALBERSTADT, INC. v. NIKE, INC., 192 F. Supp. 2d 627 (E.D. La. 2002)

. . . Chisum, Chi-sum on Patents § 20.03[4] [a] [v] (explaining that “the district court has discretion to . . .

SANTELLAN, Sr. v. COCKRELL,, 271 F.3d 190 (5th Cir. 2001)

. . . . § 20.03. . . .

LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. NEWBRIDGE NETWORKS CORP. NEWBRIDGE NETWORKS, INC., 168 F. Supp. 2d 269 (D. Del. 2001)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents, § 20.03[4][c][ii] (1999). . . .

MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA, a v. FLORIDA STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION,, 226 F.3d 1226 (11th Cir. 2000)

. . . . § 20.03(11) (“ ‘Agency,’ as the context requires, means a[ ] ... commission .... ”); see also Fla. . . . Stat. § 20.03(10). The Florida Commission falls squarely within this definition. . . .

MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA, a v. FLORIDA STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION,, 226 F.3d 1226 (11th Cir. 2000)

. . . . § 20.03(11) (“ ‘Agency,’ as the context requires, means a[ ] ... commission-”); see also Fla. . . . Stat. § 20.03(10). The Florida Commission falls squarely within this definition. . . .

BELMONT TEXTILE MACHINERY COMPANY, v. SUPERBA, S. A., 48 F. Supp. 2d 521 (W.D.N.C. 1999)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4][b][v][J] (1998). . . .

In DAVIS v., 170 F.3d 475 (5th Cir. 1999)

. . . .”); Don Campbell et al„ Creditors’ Rights Handbook, A Guide to the Debtor-Creditor Relationship, § 20.03 . . .

In DAVIS v., 170 F.3d 475 (5th Cir. 1999)

. . . ”); Don Campbell et al., Creditors’ Rights Handbook, A Guide to the Debtor-Creditor Relationship, § 20.03 . . .

STANDARD MANUFACTURING CO. INC. DBP, v. UNITED STATES,, 42 Fed. Cl. 748 (Fed. Cl. 1999)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[3][iv] at 20-188, 20-189 (1993 & Supp.1997). . . . Chisum, Chiswm on Patents § 20.03[3][b][ii] at 20-184 (1993 & Supp.1997) (industry custom “is rarely . . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[6], at 20-454 n. 11 (1993 & Supp.1997); Brunswick Corp. v. . . .

In TOWER ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. v., 260 B.R. 213 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . . §§ 20.03 and 20.04. . . .

NIKE, INC. v. WAL- MART STORES, INC., 138 F.3d 1437 (Fed. Cir. 1998)

. . . Chisum, Patents § 20.03[7] at 20-530 (Rel.46,1993). . . .

B. BOWMAN, v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS,, 133 F.3d 513 (7th Cir. 1998)

. . . In response to Garcia, on April 17, 1986, the Police Department issued General Order 20.03, which proclaimed . . .

PROCTER GAMBLE COMPANY, v. PARAGON TRADE BRANDS, INC., 989 F. Supp. 547 (D. Del. 1997)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03 at 20-77 (1997). . . . Rosen, 1992 WL 123178, at *13 (E.D.N.Y.1992); 7 Chisum, Patents § 20.03[3] at 20-159. . . . Mobil Oil, 915 F.Supp. at 1354; see 7 Chi-sum, Patents, § 20.03[3][b][ii], at 20-182 to 184. . . . clearly greater if it followed a consistent policy of refusing to grant licenses. 7 Chisum, Patents § 20.03 . . . ’s bargaining power is greater if the would be licensee is a direct competitor, 7 Chisum, Patents § 20.03 . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. GRIFFITH,, 118 F.3d 318 (5th Cir. 1997)

. . . Any such error was harmless, since the remainder, 20.03 kilograms, still warrants an offense level of . . .

STRYKER CORPORATION v. INTERMEDICS ORTHOPEDICS, INC., 962 F. Supp. 357 (E.D.N.Y. 1997)

. . . Chisum, Chisum on Patents § 20.03[4][e][iv] (“Section 285 authorizes awards of attorneys fees for appeals . . .

In TOWER ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. BARNETT BANK OF TAMPA, v. TOWER ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. OFFICIAL CREDITORS COMMITTEE, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION,, 217 B.R. 933 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . . §§ 20.03 and 20.04. . . . Stat. §§ 20.03 and 20.04. . . .