Search for: "B. v. S."
Results 441 - 460
of 57,849
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2020, 3:04 am
USPTO that upheld the award of attorney's fees to the USPTO under Section 1017(b)(3) of the Trademark Act. [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 10:15 am
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a district court’s decision dismissing a complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). [read post]
13 Aug 2020, 9:59 pm
§ 112(b). [read post]
28 Jan 2016, 9:02 am
§ 154(b), provides for the restoration of patent term in three circumstances: (i) an “A-Delay,” which awards PTA for delays arising from the USPTO’s failure to act by certain examination deadlines; (ii) a “B-Delay,” which awards PTA for an application pendency exceeding three years; and (iii) a “C-Delay,” which awards PTA for delays due to interferences, secrecy orders, and appeals. [read post]
9 Apr 2007, 10:21 pm
Edward B. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 7:30 am
In Andleton v. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 12:31 pm
In Matrixx Initiatives Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 9:36 am
”[1] The Court’s recent decision in Liu v. [read post]
22 Nov 2009, 9:07 pm
§ 1071(b)(1) seeking judicial review of the TTAB's March 2009 decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 10:58 pm
Nike, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 5:23 am
The Supreme Court’s Dukes v. [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 12:28 pm
Co. v. [read post]
27 May 2021, 7:52 am
United States that a party’s claim for contribution under Section 113(f)(3)(B) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. [read post]
17 Sep 2020, 8:23 am
State of Ohio v. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 12:16 pm
Gooch v. [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 1:18 pm
§ 271(b); Commil’s brief also presented a second question that the Court did not take: (2) whether the Federal Circuit erred in holding that Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2012, 12:47 pm
Voter Verified, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 9:00 pm
Gauvin v. [read post]
28 Aug 2014, 8:44 am
ASARCO v. [read post]
12 Jul 2018, 7:09 am
The agreement provided that Appellant would return all of Appellee’s computer files. [read post]