Search for: "Innovative Enterprises LTD" Results 1 - 20 of 266
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Aug 2019, 1:33 am
 Beijing KatKat Information innovation Co., Ltd. [read post]
17 Aug 2023, 7:51 am by lbergeson@lawbc.com
Best Process Innovation from Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) Winner: Botanical Solution Inc: Growing and extracting from plants in the lab to produce new fungicides for agriculture and QS-21 vaccine adjuvants for human health. [read post]
23 May 2008, 3:28 am
Simon Revell, Manager of Enterprise 2.0 Technology Development, Pfizer Ltd [read post]
20 Aug 2017, 9:49 pm by Helen Macpherson (AU)
Late last month, Justice Burley handed down his decision in Doric Products Pty Ltd v Asia Pacific Trading (Aust) Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 849. [read post]
20 Aug 2017, 9:49 pm by Helen Macpherson (AU)
Late last month, Justice Burley handed down his decision in Doric Products Pty Ltd v Asia Pacific Trading (Aust) Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 849. [read post]
20 Aug 2017, 9:49 pm by Helen Macpherson (AU)
Late last month, Justice Burley handed down his decision in Doric Products Pty Ltd v Asia Pacific Trading (Aust) Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 849. [read post]
20 Aug 2017, 9:49 pm by Helen Macpherson (AU)
Late last month, Justice Burley handed down his decision in Doric Products Pty Ltd v Asia Pacific Trading (Aust) Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 849. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 8:11 pm by Alex Gasser
  The complaint further defines Nalpac Enterprises, Ltd., E.T.C., Inc., Williams Trading Co., Inc., and Honey’s Place, Inc. as “Distributor Respondents,” who import, and/or sell after importation infringing kinesiotherapy devices and components thereof. [read post]
10 Nov 2010, 2:15 am
The decisive factor is that the court was set up to ensure that small and medium sized enterprises, and private individuals, were not deterred from innovation by the potential cost of litigation to safeguard their rights. [read post]
23 Aug 2014, 8:36 pm by Mark Summerfield
  Specifically, Ng has recently filed a series of five innovation patents, while local RAINBOW LOOM distributor Funtastic Limited sent letters placing Headstart International Pty Ltd and Moose Enterprise Pty Ltd, distributors of the competing CRA-Z-LOOM and FUNLOOM products in Australia, on notice of the prospective patent rights. [read post]
1 Apr 2008, 9:32 am
Please come and visit my new boutique, SCAFIDI, Ltd.! [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 7:57 pm by Eric Schweibenz
  In the Order, ALJ Pender denied Complainants Standard Innovation (US) Corp. and Standard Innovation Corporation (collectively, “SIC”) and Respondents Lelo Inc., LELOi AB, Lelo Shanghai Trading Ltd. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 6:41 am by sally
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Williams & Ors v Redcard Ltd & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 466 (20 April 2011) Berezovsky & Anor v Edmiston & Company Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 431 (19 April 2011) Finurba Corporate Finance Ltd v Sipp SA & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 465 (20 April 2011) Okafor & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 499 (20 April 2011) Vestergaard Frandsen SA ( MVf3 APS) & Ors v Bestnet Europe Ltd & Ors… [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 10:25 am by Eric Schweibenz
Respondents LELO Inc., LELOi AB, LELO, PHE, Inc. d/b/a Adam & Eve, Nalpac Enterprises, Ltd. d/b/a Nalpac, Ltd., E.T.C., Inc. d/b/a Eldorado Trading Company, Inc., Williams Trading Co., Inc., Honey’s Place, Inc., and Lover’s Lane & Co. [read post]
29 Jan 2019, 11:06 pm by Mark Summerfield
  The overwhelming majority of provisional applications are filed by Australian resident companies and individuals, and the number of filings thus reflects a combination of the amount of innovation taking place in the Australian economy, and the level of interest from Australians in protecting their ideas through the patent system.Sadly, the decline in provisional filings does not surprise me, and is symptomatic of the malaise in the Australian market that I wrote about most recently… [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 2:16 am by Helen Macpherson (AU)
In the latest decision on CII, Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd v Infotrack Pty Ltd, the Full Federal Court unanimously upheld the trial judge’s finding that the invention claimed in two innovation patents was not patentable in that it was not a manner of manufacture. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 2:16 am by Helen Macpherson (AU)
In the latest decision on CII, Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd v Infotrack Pty Ltd, the Full Federal Court unanimously upheld the trial judge’s finding that the invention claimed in two innovation patents was not patentable in that it was not a manner of manufacture. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 2:16 am by Helen Macpherson (AU)
In the latest decision on CII, Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd v Infotrack Pty Ltd, the Full Federal Court unanimously upheld the trial judge’s finding that the invention claimed in two innovation patents was not patentable in that it was not a manner of manufacture. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 2:16 am by Helen Macpherson (AU)
In the latest decision on CII, Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd v Infotrack Pty Ltd, the Full Federal Court unanimously upheld the trial judge’s finding that the invention claimed in two innovation patents was not patentable in that it was not a manner of manufacture. [read post]