Search for: "MICHAEL E. v. ADES, D. E ." Results 421 - 440 of 669
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Aug 2010, 1:17 am by Kelly
(Chicago IP Litigation Blog) District Court E D Texas: JMOL rulings – damages experts, future royalties, JMOL standards, obviousness, etc: Soverain v. [read post]
26 Aug 2010, 9:41 pm by Marie Louise
(Michael Geist) E-books, piracy peril or promotional possibilities? [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:22 am by Kelly
(Docket Report) District Court E D Texas: Competition in Marketplace, infringer’s bankruptcy, and importance of patent to plaintiff’s business all favor imposition of permanent injunction: Clearvalue v Pearl River; Retractable Technologies v Occupational & Medical Innovations (Docket Report) District Court E D Texas: As part of settlement agreement, false marking defendant gets a free pass on all future allegations of false… [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 7:17 pm by Kelly
  Highlights this week included: Oracle takes on Google’s android over Java (IPBiz) (IP Vision) (ArsTechnica) (ArsTechnica) (IPBiz) Access Copyright’s 1300% tariff increase (Michael Geist) (Excess Copyright) (Michael Geist) (Michael Geist) (Michael Geist) (Techdirt)   Please join the discussion by adding your comments on any of these stories, and please do let us know if you think we’ve missed something important, or if there… [read post]
13 Aug 2010, 1:39 am by Kelly
Iparadigms, LLC (Internet Cases) District Court N D Illinois: Plaintiff must choose between Lanham Act or copyright damages in default judgment: Flava Works, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 10:49 pm by Kelly
Highlights this week included: Breaking news: Google keyword policy change for EU (IPKat) (ArsTechnica) New DMCA exemptions (ipwars.com) (©ollectanea) (IP Spotlight) (Michael Geist) (Public Knowledge) (1709 Blog) (1709 Blog) (Intellectual Property Direction) (Electronic Frontier Foundation) (Public Knowledge) District Court C D California: Google protected by 17 USC 512(d) for links to infringing content; Perfect 10’s takedown notices were mostly insufficient:… [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 1:25 am by Kelly
Tyco Healthcare Group, LP (Gray on Claims) District Court E D Virginia: Plaintiff’s counsel’s prior prosecution work concerning defendant’s accused products warrants disqualification: Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 11:00 pm by Kelly
Amazon.com Inc (Docket Report) District Court E D Texas: Patent case transferred to California, citing location of defendants and witnesses: Software Archives v. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 12:39 am by Kelly
Phoenix Fence Company (Docket Report) District Court E D Pennsylvania: False marking intent to deceive cannot be inferred from knowledge of the limited duration of patents and expiration of marked patents: Hollander v. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 10:44 am
Young & Co), whose team of intellectual property footballing giants was as follows:Goalkeeper: Chris Woods [not could]Defence: Spencer Prior [art],[Problem and] Sol Campbell,Emanuel E-Bo-AMidfield: Emanuel Petit-[ion for review],Lother [Added] Matthaus,FRAND Lampard,OHIM HargreavesStrikers: Karim BenzITMA,Rudi Voller-[tary Divisional Application],Arjen Robben [Jacob]Manager: Giovanni [Art.123(2)/123(3) Trap]-patoniSubstitutes: Miroslav Klose-[st prior art], Gennaro Gat… [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 5:46 am by Marie Louise
Baxter Healthcare Corp (Gray on Claims) District Court E D Texas: Qui tam plaintiff cites Professor Crouch’s question to readers as proof that patent expiration dates are not readily ascertainable: North Texas Patent Group, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 6:31 am
AG Yve Bot’s opinion in Flos SpA v Semeraro Casa e Famiglia SpA (Class 99)(Class 99) Breton flour: from peasant tradition to GI protection (Class 46)     Germany The Zappanale goes on! [read post]