Search for: "Apple v. Apple" Results 41 - 60 of 6,980
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Apr 2011, 2:08 am by war
Marty’s view Now, this case is not being brought in Australia but, if it were, one would wonder about the trade dress prospects given the clear Samsung branding in light of Parkdale v Puxu and its progeny such as Playcorp v Bodum. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 6:07 pm by Barry Barnett
A law prof at a small school in the Golden State opined that the jury in Apple v. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 8:29 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
The opening of Apple v. [read post]
30 May 2011, 8:28 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Because Apple’s future products have no relevance to a preliminary injunction motion, we reject your request that Apple provide samples of such future products. [read post]
19 Oct 2011, 1:32 pm by war
Belated link to Bennett J’s reasons for granting the interlocutory injunction against Samsung’s Galaxy Tab: Apple Inc. v Samsung Electronics Co. [read post]
25 Oct 2018, 7:33 am by Jon Levitan
The post Event announcement: Georgetown panel on Apple v. [read post]
28 Mar 2016, 1:35 pm by Paul Rosenzweig
Last Thursday I participated in a discussion (not really a debate) about the broader implications of the Apple v. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 4:00 am by Michael Erdle
Maybe the parties will be more inclined to settle on the eve of trial, or even after the trial if the decision is appealed – as was the case in the Apple v. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 7:50 am by Jon Brodkin
Samsung was found to infringe this patent in 18 devices that were part of the Apple v. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 4:35 am
In the continuing battle between Apple and Samsung, Samsung recently filed an emergency motion to stay pending reexamination of an Apple patent. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 2:30 pm by Chris Foresman
Still, Apple has requested that Judge Posner rule whether or not injunctive relief was warranted.Read more | Comments [read post]