Search for: "United States v. Bayer Company"
Results 41 - 60
of 131
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2007, 7:07 am
Bayer Corp., 145 F.3d 28, 36 (1st Cir. 1998) (quoting Garren v. [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 10:49 am
United States Issue: Does United States v. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 3:44 am
In Clear with Computers, LLC v. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 4:14 am
(b) Any person may sue for the penalty, in which event one-half shall go to the person suing and the other to the use of the United States. [read post]
15 Dec 2006, 11:22 am
[of] all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented invention . . . in such manner as to actively induce the combination of such components outside of the United States,” as well as the “suppl[y] . . . from the United States [of] any component of a patented invention that is especially made or especially adapted for use in the invention. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 9:04 am
Coca-Cola has not presented any survey evidence showing awareness of either mark in the United States. . . . [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:36 pm
Abbot’s patent ‘551 was found to be unenforceable by the District Court, because Abbot failed to disclose to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) a brief filed with the European Patent Office (EPO) regarding an earlier patent, U.S. [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 3:19 am
Last month, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in the much-anticipated Pliva, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 12:23 pm
* The IPKat weblog and the European Patent Office: some points of clarificationMerpel and you need to talk.* Offering a service is not use in commerce Under Lanham Act, says Federal Circuit Court Blogger and recent guest Kat Marie-Andrée Weiss explains the ruling in David Couture v Playdom, a Federal Circuit's decision that highlights a difference of approach between the trade mark law of the United States and that of the European Union as regards the… [read post]
23 Mar 2013, 11:18 pm
” More about the Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 2:55 am
However, last week’s High Court, England and Wales, ruling in Enterprise v Europcar [2015] EWHC 300 (Ch) shows this is by no means a settled area, explains katfriend Jeremy Blum(Bristows LLP).* The Richemont ruling and beyond: dealing with counterfeit websites and the intermediaries that host themKatfriend Tim Behean provides another insightful analysis of Cartier International AG and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others [2014] EWHC 3354… [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 9:45 pm
Medicare Fraud: CLINIC OWNERS GET PRISON FOR STEALING MEDICARE FUNDS, United States v. [read post]
4 Apr 2008, 9:14 am
He indicated that two companies have already made NMSP submissions: (i) DuPont and (ii) 2PI, and that ten others have provided letters of intent to participate: (i) BASF; (ii) Bayer; (iii) Dow; (iv) Evonik; (v) GE; (vi) Nanocyl; (vii) Nanophase; (viii) PPG; (ix) Sasol North America; and (x) Strem Chemical. [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 12:10 pm
See Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Respondents, Fed. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 1:27 pm
United States EPA, 2015 U.S. [read post]
7 Feb 2019, 12:08 pm
Bayer Corp., in the Eastern District of Texas; and United States ex rel. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 2:12 pm
That case is Ransom v. [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 12:00 pm
See Tang, slip op. at 7-9.Still, some enterprising lawyers tried to make that litigation the latest Chinese export to the United States. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 1:27 pm
United States EPA, 2015 U.S. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 5:59 pm
Bayer Corp., 131 S.Ct. 2368 (2011). [read post]
