Search for: "HTC Inc."
Results 281 - 300
of 337
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Feb 2011, 7:29 am
Filed February 14, 2011 byCME Group Inc., New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc., and Board of Trade of City of Chicago, Inc. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 7:29 am
Filed February 14, 2011 byCME Group Inc., New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc., and Board of Trade of City of Chicago, Inc. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 1:43 am
Combay Inc. et al. [read post]
19 Jan 2022, 10:35 pm
Tex. and unsuccessfully appealed by Ericsson's adversary in that case, HTC, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. [read post]
9 Dec 2022, 7:47 am
Ericsson's lead U.S. counsel, Alston & Bird's Theodore "Ted" Stevenson, had largely prevailed on the structure of the Texas case--and he had previously scored a key victory there (and in the Fifth Circuit) for Ericsson against HTC. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 1:29 am
Our beloved blogmeister posted a short report last week on the decision of the Court of Appeal in the IPCom/HTC case, concerning the guidance on whether patent infringement cases should be stayed in this country when there are pending opposition proceedings at the European Patent Office.The timing of the decision was very interesting to this Kat. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 4:20 am
******************PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATE Never too late 48 [week ending on Sunday 31 May] - The meaning of EPO appeal system | 3D Printing and the law | Epo and external investigation firms | Umbrella designs | US Supreme Court in Commil USA, LLC v Cisco Systems | European Inventor Award | FIFA and brand integrity | Warner-Lambert v Actavis | Wine in Black GmbH v OHIM | IP and busking | Swiss-style claims.Never too late… [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:01 am
Of Judge and Jura-prudenceJeremy reports on Whyte & MacKay Ltd v Origin Wine UK Ltd and Dolce Co Invest Inc [2015] EWHC 1271 (Ch), a decision where Mr Justice Arnold of the Chancery Division, England and Wales, addressed the possible likelihood of confusion between JURA ORIGIN for "Scotch whisky and Scotch whisky-based liqueurs produced in Scotland" and ORIGIN and ORIGINS earlier marks.* Three aspects of information: a new eventJeremy presents "Three… [read post]
21 Jul 2011, 11:24 pm
Gateway, Inc., et. al. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 5:26 pm
(FDA Law Blog) Diovan (Vasartan) – France: Novartis v Actavis – preliminary injunction for Valsartan confirmed (The SPC Blog) Diovan HTC (Valsartan) – Belgium: Antwerp Court of Appeal stops infringement of Valsartan/HCTZ SPC based on patent claiming Valsartan alone: Novartis v Teva (The SPC Blog) Lescol (Fluvastatin) – US: Novartis files patent infringement complaint against Mylan following Para IV challenge (Patent Docs) (GenericsWeb) Mucinex (Guaifenesin) –… [read post]
10 Aug 2016, 8:14 am
Apple Inc., Appeal No. 15-2073 (Fed. [read post]
23 Apr 2010, 4:32 am
Penney Corporation, Inc. et al. [read post]
18 May 2012, 8:37 am
Here’s a big hint: This patent is owned by Apple Inc. [read post]
23 May 2010, 11:36 pm
Vertica Systems, Inc. [read post]
20 Oct 2013, 9:30 am
AEREO, INC., Dist. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 4:44 am
Google Inc. et al. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 9:16 pm
Zimmerman (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) (Copyrights & Campaigns) District Court C D California: IsoHunt told to pull .torrent files offline, likely to close: Columbia Pictures Industries Inc., et al. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2020, 12:30 am
., HTC Corp., the Eastern District of Texas held that a policy of non-review was sufficient to state a claim of willful blindness.[26] The court stated that both the creation and enforcement of “a policy prohibiting review of patents” by defendant HTC Corp. were the kinds of “‘deliberate action to avoid learning’ of potential infringement” that could amount to willful blindness and support a finding of willful infringement.[27] By contrast,… [read post]
24 May 2019, 8:38 am
, Inc v Jen, Chi [2019] SGIPOS 3. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 2:00 am
Coach USA, Inc., et al. [read post]
