Search for: "N B A PROPERTIES INC" Results 301 - 320 of 1,156
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Apr 2010, 5:28 am
Here is Think IP Strategy’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 9:00 am
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 2:39 pm by Dennis Crouch
Earlier today, I testified in Congress before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition, and the Internet. [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 7:12 pm by Eugene Volokh
Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind of N.C., Inc., 487 U.S. 781, 796–97 (1988). [2].W. [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 7:12 pm by Eugene Volokh
Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind of N.C., Inc., 487 U.S. 781, 796–97 (1988). [2].W. [read post]
24 May 2010, 10:49 pm
Cochlear Corp (Property, intangible) District Court N D Illinois: Patentee’s ‘policy and practice’ of marking was insufficient to establish compliance with marking requirement: von Holdt v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 9:33 am by Alex Gasser
  In particular, the complaint states that “[a]n electric fireplace is a kinetic sculpture approximating the size and look of a real, wood burning fireplace. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 3:00 am
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 4:00 am
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
22 May 2009, 1:44 am
DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKIntellectual Property Jury Reasonably Found No Patent Infringement In Suit Over Gem-Inscribing Laser Machinery Lazare Kaplan International Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 8:09 am by Bob Eisenbach
The Court also held that a licensee’s right to the “embodiment of such intellectual property” in Section 365(n)(1)(b) is a limited concept (and a term of art) that does not extend to all the goods Mission sought to distribute: A few common themes appear in these explanations. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 8:09 am by Bob Eisenbach
The Court also held that a licensee’s right to the “embodiment of such intellectual property” in Section 365(n)(1)(b) is a limited concept (and a term of art) that does not extend to all the goods Mission sought to distribute: A few common themes appear in these explanations. [read post]