Search for: "Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. "
Results 41 - 60
of 221
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Dec 2017, 2:18 pm
Icon Health& Fitness, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 4:09 am
The statute provides that the court may award attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party “in exceptional cases” (see Octane Fitness, LLC v Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., __ US __, __, 134 S Ct 1749, 1756 [2014]). [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 3:58 pm
See, e.g., Icon Health & Fitness,Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 9:27 am
Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. [read post]
16 Jun 2017, 7:40 pm
IconHealth & Fitness, Inc. v. [read post]
25 May 2017, 1:23 pm
Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. [read post]
15 May 2017, 6:56 am
Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., No. [read post]
11 May 2017, 8:58 am
., Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 5:59 am
ICON Health and Fitness, Inc., 134 S. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 4:59 am
ICON Health and Fitness, Inc., 134 S. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 9:59 pm
Patent No. 6,701,271 (owned by Icon Health & Fitness) are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter and are, therefore, invalid under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
28 Mar 2017, 9:59 pm
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. and Highmark Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2017, 9:59 pm
And in its decision handed down today in Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2017, 9:18 am
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. [read post]
23 Feb 2017, 9:18 am
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 7:17 am
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 7:15 am
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. [read post]
3 Nov 2016, 9:18 am
Icon Health and Fitness altered the fee analysis under the Lanham Act, vacating the panel decision. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 1:26 pm
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.,[1] relaxed the applicable standard in construing the Patent Act’s identical fee-shifting provision and will likely result in a lower bar to the recovery of fees in trademark disputes. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 1:26 pm
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.,[1] relaxed the applicable standard in construing the Patent Act’s identical fee-shifting provision and will likely result in a lower bar to the recovery of fees in trademark disputes. [read post]