Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 8761 - 8780
of 19,260
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jun 2013, 2:43 pm
One is our dear friend and colleague, patent attorney and IPKat team member and ready wit Darren Smyth; another is a cherished former Kat colleague, attorney, scholar and part-time Federal Swiss Patent Judge Mark Schweizer. [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 12:26 am
On 2 September 2021, Judge Leonie M Brinkema in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (‘EDVA’) rejected Dr Stephen Thaler’s appeal against the USPTO’s decision to refuse two patent applications on the basis that DABUS is not a human being and therefore cannot be an inventor under US law (Stephen Thaler v Andrew Hirshfeld and the US Patent and Trademark Office, Mem. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 3:11 am
Miller v. [read post]
17 Oct 2014, 12:00 am
Post by Alex Christian The 1996 United States Supreme Court decision in Markman v. [read post]
22 Nov 2021, 4:00 am
From SSRN:Frederick Mark Gedicks, Custom, Preference, or Nature? [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 5:11 am
Collins v. [read post]
18 Jul 2015, 9:11 am
In Potter v. [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 12:26 am
In this article, I shall turn my attention to the split decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents Trade Marks And Designs [2021] EWCA Civ 1374, in which parallel efforts to name DABUS as an inventor have also been rejected, with Thaler’s appeal being dismissed despite a weighty dissent by Lord Justice Birss. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 7:44 am
In Burwell, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. [read post]
21 Jul 2015, 8:24 pm
Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003); Grutter v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 3:03 pm
Texas, and expanded state sovereign immunity in Franchise Tax Board of California v. [read post]
21 Feb 2016, 2:42 pm
Bunn v. [read post]
13 Sep 2017, 3:00 am
Max Gerboc v Context Logic, Inc., 2017 WL 3497405 (6th Cir. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 2:21 am
In Arizona v. [read post]
17 Apr 2008, 12:28 pm
Stephenson v. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 3:23 am
As Kat readers may recall, in May 2015, the UK Supreme Court ruled in the case of Starbucks (HK) v. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 4:02 am
They depend on, amongst other things, factors particular to the person tasting the product concerned, such as age, food preferences and consumption habits, as well as on the environment or context in which the product is consumed.Moreover, it is not possible in the current state of scientific development to achieve by technical means a precise and objective identification of the taste of a food product which enables it to be distinguished from the taste of other products of the same… [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 8:26 am
Why then is there a check mark next to it saying it’s “verified"? [read post]
12 Nov 2019, 12:37 pm
Ltd & Rhodia Operations S.A.S. v Neo Chemicals and Oxides Limited & Neo Performance Materials Inc. [read post]
12 Jan 2014, 7:54 am
The CAFC stated that"[t]he problem of divided infringement in induced infringement cases typically arises only with respect of method claims... [read post]
