Search for: "INTERNATIONAL CUSTOM PRODUCTS V US"
Results 181 - 200
of 2,177
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Mar 2011, 5:51 am
Optigen, LLC v. [read post]
18 Nov 2016, 9:05 am
Court of International Trade. [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 4:42 am
That was an issue in Talisman Energy v. [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 4:20 am
The details are adjusted in order to produce a package which will play its part in attracting a customer. [read post]
6 Feb 2017, 2:03 pm
Lexmark, a case about patent exhaustion, or whether a patent holder can put limits on how a customer can use, resell, tinker with, or analyze a patented product the customer has purchased. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 5:13 am
VWR Intern. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 9:53 am
From customs law blogger Larry Friedman, here is a brief summary of an interesting Section 337 case, Tianrui Group v. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 7:07 am
” The decision is Polypore International, Inc. v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 10:16 am
Finding no direct infringement because eBay does not produce a competing “product,” the Court of Appeals looked to the Inwood Test (Inwood Lab., Inc. v. [read post]
24 Jun 2023, 2:55 pm
Court of International Trade. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 4:48 pm
Customs and Border Protection classified these items under chapters 61 and 62 if the HTSUS. [read post]
21 May 2017, 8:04 pm
In Genesco, Inc. v. [read post]
21 May 2017, 8:04 pm
In Genesco, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Apr 2009, 12:51 pm
By Eric Goldman Rescuecom Corp. v. [read post]
1 May 2013, 10:28 am
The expert used the inherent functionality of SAP’s software to conduct hierarchical pricing based on customer and product hierarchies. [read post]
4 May 2013, 3:22 pm
Sure you do, it's a classic of the customs blog genre.The Court of International Trade has now decided the relevant cases, which are Lerner New York, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 11:03 am
Its business plan called for the importer to supply at no cost to the foreign producer, the raw materials used in the production of the finished goods. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 3:37 pm
Apparently, at some time prior to this case, Customs ruled on the classification of similar products for Nortel, a company that is not involved in this litigation and is currently in joint U.S. [read post]
2 Nov 2021, 1:29 am
Second, both the offending sign and registered mark must be used in relation to similar goods and services ("Similar Product Element"). [read post]
