Search for: "U. S. Patent Office" Results 461 - 480 of 705
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jun 2019, 9:31 am by Timothy B. Lee
" Beyond that, the US Patent and Trademark Office looked at the products being sold under the FUCT mark. [read post]
27 Nov 2021, 2:20 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
In May 2014, the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) issued the requested Principal Register registrations—Nos. 4,524,540 and 4,532,073—under Lanham Act § 1(a), 15 U.S.C. [read post]
19 Feb 2013, 6:18 am by Rachel, Law Clerk
Schmidt/New York Times) Supreme Court to Hear Monsanto Seed Patent Case Toronto’s tattoo parlours, hair salons to face tougher licensing rules  - Rachel Spence, Law Clerk Visit our Toronto Law Office website: www.wiselaw.net Visit our website: www.wiselaw.net [read post]
14 Jan 2009, 9:08 am
From the Court's syllabus: Officers in Coffee County arrested petitioner Herring based on a warrant listed in neighboring Dale County’s database. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 12:12 pm by Dave Ratner
Brunetti, fashion designer Erik Brunetti appealed a decision by the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) denying his application to federally register the trademark “FUCT. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 5:35 pm by Colin O'Keefe
Carter Ruml of Stites & Harbison on the firm’s blog, Stites on Estates Patenting Stem Cells in View of the USPTO’s New Interim Guidance – Silicon Valley lawyer Antoinette Konski of Foley & Lardner on the firm’s blog, Personalized Medicine Bulletin Patents – Grounded in History, Vital for the Future – Chicago lawyer Richard Beem on his blog, Beem on Patents Newsgathering Drones: Prepare for Takeoff?… [read post]
8 Jan 2012, 7:56 pm
He said: "Really, the challenge that's facing the courts and patent office and all of us is to put some teeth (in the law) and use common sense, like the Supreme Court said in 2007. [read post]
21 May 2012, 2:15 pm by Matthew Bush
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc.Docket: 11-301Issue(s): (1) Whether the Patent and Trademark Offices (“PTO”) presumptively valid finding that an invention is not obvious and is thus patentable over a prior art patent is impermissibly nullified or undermined when a jury is allowed to find, by a mere preponderance of the evidence, that the patented invention is “insubstantially different” from the very… [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 5:38 am by Wes Anderson
  Otherwise, here’s hoping for an amicable settlement — after all, it’s just two “Us put together. [read post]
6 Feb 2007, 2:00 pm
Duffy has this post on the Nuijten case being argued to the Federal Circuit today, in which he discusses the Patent and Trademark Office's textualist approach to the interpretation of the Patent Act. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 6:50 am by William Carleton
Our Chief Executive Officer recently testified before the U.S. [read post]