Search for: "He v. Holder"
Results 2941 - 2960
of 5,732
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Feb 2013, 5:21 am
At PatentDocs (here and here), Kevin Noonan continues to review the various amicus briefs filed in Bowman v. [read post]
4 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
In Snyder v. [read post]
24 Nov 2009, 6:04 am
[Link] Presumption of Validity: Lucent v. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 8:48 am
Should the life insurance policy holder live beyond his or her life expectancy, Provident would pay the death benefit. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 12:32 pm
The action (VS Technologies v. [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 12:21 pm
Back in 1834, the Supreme Court decided in Wheaton v. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 6:35 am
Fteja v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 6:43 am
MGFB Properties, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 4:30 am
’The Court this morning ruled as follows: " Articles 5 and 7 ... must be interpreted as meaning that the holder of an exclusive licence for the use of composite gas bottles intended for re-use, the shape of which is protected as a three-dimensional mark and to which the holder has affixed its own name and logo that are registered as word and figurative marks, may not prevent those bottles, after consumers have purchased them and consumed the gas initially contained in… [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 2:04 pm
Bollinger and Grutter v. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 7:31 am
Co. v. [read post]
23 May 2017, 3:15 am
In Cooper v. [read post]
22 May 2024, 9:20 am
., LLC v. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 7:52 am
It described the section as putting the matter to the patentee's (or in this case, exclusive licensee's) election: “if he wants damages for the non-registration period he must forego costs; if he wants costs then he must forego damages for the period of non-registration. [read post]
25 Aug 2018, 1:06 pm
Today's CopyKat takes a look at Disney claiming fair use, lawyers behaving badly, copyright policy in trade agreements, Aerosmith v. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 4:52 pm
Schmidlin v. [read post]
26 Mar 2013, 7:22 am
Silvers v. [read post]
2 Jan 2018, 3:17 am
In Byrd v. [read post]
5 Aug 2008, 7:18 pm
In Judge Davis's original order, he stated that he was contemplating granting a new trial based on a possible error in Jury Instruction No. 15. [read post]
24 May 2012, 10:06 am
Gutierrez, consolidated with Holder v. [read post]
