Search for: "E.I. Du Pont De Nemours " Results 41 - 60 of 211
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Dec 2019, 7:18 am by Jon L. Gelman
DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY C-8 PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION, 939 F. [read post]
18 Oct 2019, 10:02 am by William K. Berenson
Merrell Dow Pharms. and the Texas Supreme Court  in E.I. du Pont de Nemours v. [read post]
13 Oct 2019, 1:40 pm by Kevin LaCroix
In the latest example of this type of litigation, a plaintiff shareholder has now filed a securities suit against The Chemours Company, a chemical company that spun out of E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (“DuPont”) in July 2015. [read post]
20 Mar 2019, 7:29 am
He received a bachelor’s degree in chemistry from Worcester Polytechnic Institute, a master’s degree in chemistry from the University of Delaware, and a law degree from Georgetown University.He spent 36 years with E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., at the time the world’s largest chemical company. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 4:16 am by Jon L. Gelman
Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 118 N.J.L. 404, 193 A. 194 (1937), aff'd 119 N.J.L. 427, 197 A. 276 (Err. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 10:28 am by James Hastings
  To establish a Section 2(d) case for likelihood of confusion, the Board undertakes the 13-part test found in the case In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973). [read post]
10 Dec 2018, 1:27 pm by James Hastings
  The analysis of whether a likelihood of confusion exists has been enunciated in the 13 part test found in the case seminal case  In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973) (the “DuPont Factors”). [read post]
3 Oct 2018, 2:26 pm by James Hastings
  To do so, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board looks to a 13-part test set forth in the seminal case  In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973) (the “DuPont Factors”). [read post]
28 Aug 2018, 3:09 pm by James Hastings
   In Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion cases,  the plaintiff must establish the presence of a likelihood of confusion between the parties’ trademarks pursuant to the thirteen factors set forth in the case of In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973). [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 5:20 am by Jon Gelman
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, 101 N.J. 161, 501 A.2d 505 (1985), appeal after remand 226 N.J.Super. 572, 545 A.2d 213 (App.Div.1988), judgment aff'd 115 N.J. 252, 558 A.2d 461 (1989). [read post]
22 Feb 2018, 5:57 pm by Jon Gelman
Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 118 N.J.L. 404, 193 A. 194 (1937), aff'd 119 N.J.L. 427, 197 A. 276 (Err. [read post]
Du Pont de Nemours, Louisville Works, 346 NLRB No. 113 (2016) and clarified that an employer does not have an affirmative duty to bargain over employment actions that are consistent with its past practice. [read post]
18 Dec 2017, 7:00 am by Joy Waltemath
Du Pont de Nemours, Louisville Works, (August 26, 2016) (DuPont)—where a divided Board held that actions consistent with an established past practice constitute a change, and therefore require the employer to provide the union with notice and an opportunity to bargain prior to implementation, if the past practice was created under a management-rights clause in a CBA that has expired, or if the disputed actions involved employer discretion. [read post]
8 Oct 2017, 10:12 am by Wolfgang Demino
Texas Supreme Court to hear oral argument on Tuesday, October 10, 2017 in client's fee fight with his former attorney following conclusion of drawn-out fight over inheritance money. [read post]
23 Sep 2017, 12:39 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Cir. 2004), the specification may be used to interpret what the patent holder meant by a word or phrase in the claim,E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. [read post]