Search for: "The Procter & Gamble Distributing LLC"
Results 1 - 20
of 23
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Apr 2010, 4:11 am
We previously posted about a case in which a federal judge threw out a purported class action against L’Oreal USA Inc. and Procter & Gamble Distributing LLC that accused the companies of selling Cover Girl and Maybelline lipsticks containing lead. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 7:29 pm
Procter & Gamble Distributing, LLC 14-958Issue: Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 702, as interpreted by Daubert v. [read post]
21 Jul 2009, 6:56 am
., GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare LLC, GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare, LP, and Block Drug Company, Inc.) supported the Plaintiffs' motion for consolidation, while the Proctor and Gamble Fixodent Defendants (The Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co. and The Procter & Gamble Distributing LLC) opposed consolidation. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 11:30 am
As recently as July 25, Procter & Gamble Company recalled two lots of prescription renal dry cat food due to concerns of potential Salmonella contamination. [read post]
6 Apr 2016, 8:31 am
Supreme Court Rejects Procter & Gamble’s Challenge on “Snake Oil” Claim Procter & Gamble’s (“P&G’s”) efforts to get the U.S. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 8:05 pm
Procter & Gamble Distributing, LLC), 795 F. [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 4:42 am
., Procter & Gamble Distributing LLC, MZB Personal Care, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Nestle Inc. as defendants. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 11:49 am
Procter & Gamble Distributing LLC, Case No. 9:09- CV-80625, the MDL court had granted Procter & Gamble’s motion to exclude the opinions of Plaintiffs’ general causation experts. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 10:05 am
Now, a federal judge has thrown out a purported class action against L’Oreal USA Inc. and Procter & Gamble Distributing LLC that accused the companies of selling Cover Girl and Maybelline lipsticks containing lead. [read post]
19 Sep 2014, 8:13 am
Procter & Gamble Distributing, LLC, 2014 WL4454979 (11th Cir. [read post]
14 May 2015, 2:15 pm
Procter & Gamble Distributing, LLC 14-958Issue: Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 702, as interpreted by Daubert v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 3:59 am
” Procter & Gamble Co. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 9:00 am
Software Pty Ltd v Bing Technologies Pty Limited (No 1) (Australian Trade Marks Law Blog) Australian Bureau of Statistics going CC, under attribution-only licence (Creative Commons) (Michael Geist) Canada Depreciation a possible ground in opposition proceedings: Parmalat Canada Inc v Sysco Corporation (Canadian Trademark Blog) Trademarks Office considers changes to opposition practice (International Law Office) Parody defence not available according to BC Supreme Court: Canwest v Horizon… [read post]
19 Jun 2022, 1:40 pm
Califia Farms, LLC (2020) 44 Cal.App.5th 1125, 1135 (Shaeffer).) [read post]
15 Jan 2008, 3:06 am
Procter & Gamble Company, The filed 04/23/07 closed 10/02/07 1:07-cv-02249 Onischuk v. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 3:00 am
Filed August 5, 2010 by The Procter & Gamble Company. (5) 95/001,416 (electronically filed) – U.S. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 7:00 am
(IP Think Tank) IEEE patent scorecard for 2008 is out (Innovationpartners) (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) Patent databases: 2008 in review (Patent Librarian's Notebook) New kind codes for republished PCT documents (Patent Librarian’s Notebook) The model changes at PatentFreedom; Matsushita is top troll target (IAM) Patent litigation, the ITC, and hardship in the chip industry (IP finance) Global - Copyright Public domain day 2009 (Creative Commons), (Michael Geist)… [read post]
23 Jan 2009, 1:00 am
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 8:04 pm
A method for managing bulk e-mail distribution comprising the steps: (A) matching a target recipient profile with a group of target recipients; (B) transmitting a set of bulk e-mails to said target recipients in said matched group; (C) calculating a quantity of e-mails in said set of bulk e-mails which have been successfully received by said target recipients; and, (D) if said calculated quantity does not exceed a prescribed minimum quantity of successfully received e-mails, repeating steps… [read post]
31 Dec 2014, 5:00 am
We at the DDLaw blog wish all our readers a Happy New Year as 2014 recedes inexorably into our rear-view mirror. [read post]
