Search for: "USA V. IN"
Results 2281 - 2300
of 11,074
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2021, 2:39 pm
Lim v. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 4:06 pm
See Novo Nordisk A/S v. [read post]
7 Jun 2016, 5:22 pm
This case returns to this court on vacatur and remandfrom the Supreme Court, “for further consideration inlight of Commil USA, LLC v. [read post]
21 Jan 2025, 4:33 pm
Plumrose Holding Ltd. v. [read post]
27 May 2015, 7:44 am
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Tuesday in Commil USA, LLC., v. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 7:00 am
Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Presbytery of Ohio Valley, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Mar 2021, 6:15 am
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent opinion in Lyngaas v. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 6:40 am
Title: Strickland v. [read post]
19 Aug 2012, 2:40 pm
Espenscheid v. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 6:52 am
The Federal Circuit also reiterated that the TTAB need not find that the German company owned U.S. trademark rights to bring a cancellation action (Piano Factory Group, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2022, 1:40 am
The court, wading into the often labyrinthine doctrine of federal court abstention and the related Colorado River “wise judicial administration doctrine,” held that the stay could not be reviewed on appeal because resolution of the earlier state court proceeding would not effectively deprive the federal court of jurisdiction to determine the trademark claims once the stay was lifted (Window World International, LLC v. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 6:14 am
Any error in the Board’s claim construction was harmless and substantial evidence, including the claim language and expert testimony, supported the Board’s findings of motivation to combine (Bot M8 LLC v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 7:07 am
” (Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 5:32 am
In reviewing the case de novo, the court of appeals found that a reasonable factfinder could determine that there was a likelihood of confusion, contrary to the decision of the district court, and reversed and remanded for a bench trial (FCOA LLC v. [read post]
24 Nov 2021, 6:00 am
While the Federal Circuit largely affirmed the Board’s decision denying the petition for cancellation under the likelihood of confusion test because of laches and acquiescence with a four-year delay, the Federal Circuit vacated the Board’s decision, in part, because the Board erred in its acquired distinctiveness analysis (Brooklyn Brewery Corp. v. [read post]
11 May 2022, 8:33 am
Thus, the judgment was reversed to the extent that it decided to award profits and the case remanded fort a new trial on that issue (Harbor Breeze Corp. v. [read post]
Second Circuit Describes Twombly as Having Created Heightened Pleading Standard for Antitrust Claims
28 Apr 2008, 4:35 am
(USA), --- F.3d ----, 2008 WL 1836640 (2d Cir. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 2:04 pm
Levine v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 10:50 am
Co. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 11:46 am
S.A.R.L., et al. v. [read post]
