Search for: "LJS, Inc." Results 61 - 80 of 171
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jul 2017, 4:03 pm by INFORRM
On the same day Macfarlane LJ refused permission to appeal in the long running application in the case of Lokhova v Tymula. [read post]
9 Apr 2017, 4:33 pm by INFORRM
 The claim against the first defendant, Google Inc, continues. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 7:35 am
    Careful what you consent to: Adwords and ArgosArgos Ltd v Argos Systems Inc [2017] EWHC 231(February 2017)Argos is a well-known UK High Street retailer. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 9:24 am
Inc. [2007] EWHC 1900 (Pat), which settled before trial. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 2:44 am
In Interflora Inc v Marks and Spencer Plc [2012] EWCA Civ 1501 Lewison LJ referred to Neutrogena [1996] R.P.C. 473 that:"...There is passing off even if most of the people are not fooled most of the time but enough are for enough of the time. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 12:00 am
  The Court of Appeal reiterated the approach to construction of numerical features and ranges in patent claims as set out in paragraph 38 of Smith & Nephew plc v ConvaTec Technologies Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 607. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 3:36 pm
In these circumstances and absent an error of principle, an appellate court will be very cautious in differing from the judge's evaluation: see SmithKline Beecham's Patent [2006] RPC 323 at [38] per Lord Hoffmann; Halliburton Energy Services Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd and anor [2006] EWCA Civ 1715 at [24] to [25] per Jacob LJ" 3. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 1:52 am by Nick Dyson, Olswang LLP
The first appellant, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, is the ultimate parent company for the Lehman Brothers group. [read post]
1 May 2016, 12:08 am
In that case, Lewison LJ agreed with Kitchin LJ’s reliance on an Australian case, Dart Industries Inc v Décor Corp Pty Limited [1994] FSR 567, in which the court had held that “… where a defendant has foregone the opportunity to manufacture and sell alternative products it will ordinarily be appropriate to attribute to the infringing product a proportion of the general overheads which would have sustained the opportunity. [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 2:11 pm
 Such a declaration takes support from Arrow Generics Ltd v Merck & Co Inc .FKB's declaration intends to establish that its products were anticipated or obvious at the priority dates of the two patents. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 9:46 am
 The Court of Appeal drew assistance from the Australian case of Dart Industries Inc v Decor Corp Pty Ltd [1994] FSR 567 which involved an account of profits. [read post]
15 Dec 2015, 6:26 am
 In Generics v Lundbeck [2006] EWCA Civ 1261 its interpretation was described as difficult (per Jacob LJ paragraph 8). [read post]