Search for: "Del Corp v. T A V Holdings Inc" Results 221 - 240 of 281
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Dec 2010, 2:05 am by Kelly
(PatLit) Judgment of similarity of designs in China (Class 99) Denmark When toilet seats make impressions on their users: Duravit AG v B&N Developing ApS (Class 99) Europe European patent – Further steps to enhanced cooperation (EPLAW) (IPJUR) (IPKat) (inovia) (IAM) General Court: More absolute grounds: KOMPRESSOR PLUS (Class 46) General Court confirms likelihood of confusion: Bianchin v OHMI – Grotto (GASOLINE) (Class 46) General Court finds HALLUX descriptive for… [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 1:47 pm
(Medford, MA; Timothy Labelle, President) All Rite Door Corp. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 2:22 pm by admin
Amerada Hess Corp., 379 F.3d 32, 50 (2d Cir. 2004) (holding expert witness’s specific causation opinion that plaintiff’s squamous cell carcinoma had been caused by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons was unreliable, when plaintiff had smoked and drunk alcohol) Deutsch v. [read post]
1 Nov 2008, 3:12 am
Weber Company neglects to defend its mark (Class 46)   Serbia Balkan anti-counterfeiting - Serbia and Macedonia customs authorities border closures (RelatIP)   South Africa Debate about abandonment of the Springbok, South Africa's traditional rugby emblem (Afro-IP) Spain Geographic indications v trade marks: Supreme Court confirms refusal of Spanish trade mark application for VINO DE LA TIERRA ARRIBES DEL DUERO (translation: wine from the land of… [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 4:33 am by Peter J. Sluka
 Those changes met Court approval in Boilermakers Local 154 Retirement Fund v Chevron Corp., 73 A3d 934 [Del Ch 2013], and ATP Tour, Inc. v Deutscher Tennis Bund, 91 A3d 554 [Del 2014]. [read post]
26 Oct 2020, 11:18 am by Andy Foreman
[xxxi] When parties to contracts operate consistently with their contracts’ express terms, we don’t usually call it “theft”; we call it “performance. [read post]
14 Feb 2021, 3:33 pm by Richard Hunt
” No, that won’t work In Rutherford v. [read post]