Search for: "US v. Coats"
Results 201 - 220
of 1,082
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jul 2012, 10:17 am
Under Caraco, use codes must coincide with patent scope In Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd. v. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 5:28 am
The patent The relevant patent claims relate to the use of a given dosage unit of tadalafil (1-5mg), up to a maximum dose of 5mg per day, for use in sexual dysfunction (the claims are in both EPC 2000 format (a purpose-limited product claim) and in Swiss-form (a purpose-limited process claim)). [read post]
22 Mar 2009, 8:52 pm
Warner Chilcott Laboratories Ireland Ltd. et al. v. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 3:38 am
Proctor & Gamble Co. et al. v. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 11:12 am
Quite a way to begin an opinion, from Kremen v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 10:00 am
The personal injury verdict in Raul Luna et al. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2021, 9:36 am
State v. [read post]
5 Nov 2016, 1:14 pm
” Id.Of legal matters:We review the grant of summary judgment de novo.See Akzo Nobel Coatings, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 5:46 am
In T.P. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 8:52 am
By Andrew DelaneyState Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2008, 2:26 pm
Thus Mann J was right on that point too.* The judge's findings that the nature of the waxed product (i) reduced the risk of charring, (ii) gave rise to a noticeable difference if a low temperature soldering iron were used and (iii) created a more easily-removable coating were not supported by the evidence. * Mann J should not have inferred that Thorn's waxed coating would probably move aside more readily with less heat being applied. [read post]
12 Sep 2007, 6:05 am
Viking Yacht Co. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 12:24 am
By way of example, in reaching a conclusion about the alleged likelihood of confusion between PLASTI DIP and FLEXIDIP, both for rubberized plastic coating products, the TTAB would ignore the different visual impressions of the marks and the different house marks on the packaging (Performix v. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 2:26 am
USA: Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jan 2021, 3:44 am
In The Sherwin-Williams Company v. [read post]
26 May 2012, 8:41 pm
Apotex Pty Ltd v AstraZeneca AB [2011] FCA 1520 (14 December 2011) Apotex Pty Ltd v AstraZeneca AB (No 2) [2012] FCA 142 (28 February 2012) Watson Pharma Pty Ltd v AstraZeneca AB [2012] FCA 200 (9 March 2012) Apotex Pty Ltd v AstraZeneca AB (No 3) [2012] FCA 265 (23 March 2012) AstraZenenca’s cholesterol drug CRESTOR will remain without generic competition in the Australian market for the foreseeable future, following a series of interlocutory decisions… [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 6:18 am
Coates, IV. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 1:44 pm
Quinn Heraty reports on the trademark battle to make us forget SPAM v. [read post]
6 May 2008, 12:37 pm
Coates v. [read post]
7 Jun 2017, 1:40 pm
Jordan Brunner and Emma Kohse provided a detailed overview of Carpenter v. [read post]
