Search for: "Patent & Trademark Office"
Results 361 - 380
of 14,694
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jan 2024, 9:15 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is one of 10 government agencies that are partnering with NSF on the pilot. [read post]
24 Jan 2024, 6:50 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Kathi Vidal on Monday made public an order from December awarding VLSI Technology LLC $413,264.15 for “time spent addressing OpenSky’s abusive behavior” in a years-long and circuitous case between the two companies. [read post]
24 Jan 2024, 6:50 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Kathi Vidal on Monday made public an order from December awarding VLSI Technology LLC $413,264.15 for “time spent addressing OpenSky’s abusive behavior” in a years-long and circuitous case between the two companies. [read post]
24 Jan 2024, 4:14 am
Waterdrop also pointed to FRCP 45(a)(3), which states that an attorney may authorize and issue a subpoena if authorized to practice in the issuing court. 35 USC Section 24 states that "the clerk of any United States court for the district wherein testimony is to be taken for use in any contested case in the Patent and Trademark Office shall, upon the application of any party thereto, issue a subpoena for any witness residing or being within the district. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 9:30 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to decide his trademark cancellation case against Apple, Inc. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 9:30 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to decide his trademark cancellation case against Apple, Inc. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 8:01 am
Vidal represented by Peter John Sawert, United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 5:17 am
What is more, however, is that GO’s constitutional argument is based on a faulty premise: that the Patent and Trademark Office’s (“PTO”) application of the so-called “Informational Matter Doctrine” results in the per se refusal of any mark that contains informational matter, regardless whether or not consumers perceive the mark as source identifying. [read post]
22 Jan 2024, 9:05 pm
Patent and Trademark Office explains, is to encourage the creation and distribution of works for public benefit. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 6:00 am
Protect Your Intellectual Property Brand owners should take necessary steps such as ensuring names or slogans associated with the leading product are registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 5:14 pm
Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) stance that the Supreme Court decision applies across the board without regard to technology, and instruct USPTO personnel to continue to use the Wands factors when assessing enablement. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 1:24 pm
Copyright Office | U.S. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 10:00 am
Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) states, ” a trademark protects brand names and logos used on goods and services. [read post]
17 Jan 2024, 4:15 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). [read post]
17 Jan 2024, 4:15 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 8:29 pm
Patent and Trademark Office reminded stakeholders that starting at 12:01 am (ET) on January 17, the filing of new, non-provisional utility patent applications with specification, claims, and abstract in a non-DOCX filing format will incur a surcharge of up to $400. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 2:22 am
On 20 December 2023, the UK Supreme Court handed down its highly anticipated judgment in the case of Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks [2023] UKSC 49, unanimously ruling that only a natural person can be named as an inventor on a patent application. [read post]
11 Jan 2024, 9:31 pm
Patent and Trademark Office published a Notice in the Federal Register (89 Fed. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 3:30 pm
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published guidelines for examiners today on the topic of enablement in light of the Supreme Court’s May 2023 decision in Amgen v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 3:30 pm
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published guidelines for examiners today on the topic of enablement in light of the Supreme Court’s May 2023 decision in Amgen v. [read post]
