Search for: "United States v. AT&T, Inc."
Results 7821 - 7840
of 8,841
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Aug 2009, 6:18 am
CIPO launches ‘promoting respect for IP rights’ (Michael Geist) Can’t stop, won’t stop: CIPO changes section 45 procedures (Canadian Trademark Blog) Copyright, fair dealing, satire and parody: some background (David Akin’s On the Hill) China New red dawn in patents: More Chinese than foreign companies filed invention patents (IP Dragon) Copyright infringement and the end of the world (China Hearsay) China patents work and… [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 3:49 am
Supp. 2d 302, 306 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (citing United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 11:51 am
United States v. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 7:21 am
The parties selected Edward Naythons (“Naythons”), a retired United States Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, as the neutral arbitrator. . . . [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 4:42 am
Supp. 2d 302, 306 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (citing United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2009, 8:45 pm
United States, 909 F.2d 495, 499 (Fed. [read post]
30 Jul 2009, 4:16 am
Medtronic, Inc., 128 S. [read post]
29 Jul 2009, 12:04 pm
The building owner and the tenants must divide up the condemnation award by contract.In City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States v. [read post]
29 Jul 2009, 7:47 am
Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc. [read post]
28 Jul 2009, 10:01 am
Growth v. [read post]
28 Jul 2009, 3:00 am
” State ex reI. 2 Dunlap v. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 3:30 pm
In a similar vein, I noted that in the Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 7:18 am
: Whirlpool Corporation v Kenwood Ltd (IPKat) EWHC (Pat): EP 258 valid in Netherlands but not UK: Novartis AG and Cibavision AG v Johnson & Johnson Medical Ltd & Ors (IPKat) EWHC (QB): When lawfully seized items can’t be retained under s 22 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (1709 Copyright Blog) United States US General Obama IP vacancies (IP Frontline) Kappos confirmation hearing set for 29 July (IP Watchdog) (IAM) (Peter… [read post]
24 Jul 2009, 2:42 am
See United States v. [read post]
24 Jul 2009, 1:02 am
However, the judge did not err in applying Article 7(1)(e); what he had actually done was to state that the policy underlying that article was relevant to the assessment of whether there was a sufficient similarity for the purposes of Article 9(1)(c), both the mark and the sign being shapes. * An assessment of similarity had to be carried out on a global basis by reference to the degree of similarity between the mark and the sign (here the Court cited Case C-252/07 Intel Corp Inc… [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 7:05 am
A T Massey Coal Co., Inc., 556 US ___ (No. 08-22, decided June 8, 2009). [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 5:51 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 2:19 pm
Elsewhere in Washington, D.C., the United States Senate has also weighed in in favor of E-Verify. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 10:37 am
” Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 7:43 am
[4] Original Appalachian Artworks, Inc. v. [read post]
