Search for: "Smith v. Smith & Nephew, Inc." Results 41 - 60 of 296
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Jul 2020, 8:59 pm by Patent Docs
Noonan -- Last fall, the Federal Circuit decided in Arthrex, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Jan 2014, 4:33 am
A related prior dispute between Convatec and Smith & Nephew involving nonsilverised versions of their respective products, Aquacel and Durafiber, and relating to a different patent, was reported by the IPKat here, and the appeal decision upholding the first instance judgement can be read on BAILII.But let us return to the current case Smith & Nephew Plc v Convatec Technologies Inc & Anor No 2 [2013] EWHC 3955 (Pat) (12 December… [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:00 am
Smith & Nephew, by contrast, contended that “type” referred to a particular polymer – i.e. to the chemistry of the fibre. [read post]
9 Jul 2020, 8:15 pm by Patent Docs
Smith & Nephew, Inc., that administrative patent judges ("APJs") were improperly appointed in violation of the Appointments Clause, to ex parte proceedings in In re Boloro Global Limited. [read post]
31 Jan 2020, 1:53 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. [read post]
13 Oct 2020, 8:08 pm by Patent Docs
Smith & Nephew, Inc., in which the court of appeals held how administrative patent judges were appointed to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB") violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution (Art. [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 8:08 pm by Patent Docs
Smith & Nephew, Inc., a three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit held that the way the U.S. [read post]
7 May 2020, 12:53 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320(Fed. [read post]