Search for: "B. J. Floyd"
Results 81 - 100
of 138
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Sep 2013, 9:08 am
J & J Sports states that it is the exclusive domestic commercial distributor of Star Power: Floyd Mayweather, Jr. v. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 1:36 am
Floyd, R. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
The other day, I was blogging about tags, and somebody asked what are all the tags. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 12:29 pm
Mr Justice Floyd allowed the proposed amendments to the '881 patent and held the patent to be valid. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 4:38 am
So I looked elsewhere, and found J. [read post]
10 Aug 2012, 8:33 am
With the skilled addressee and specification out of the way, Floyd J was tasked with determining what Virgin's 908 patent meant. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 12:17 am
HTC's devices would have infringed the claims if they were valid, but they were not, said Floyd J. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 11:00 am
(Bronx); Lillian Roberts, Executive Director, District Council 37, AFSCME; John Samuelsen, President Transport Workers Union Local 100; Gregory Floyd, President, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 237. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 7:42 am
VEGF Trap Eye Floyd J’s decision was in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc, Bayer Pharma AG v Genentech Inc. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 5:11 am
Floyd Abrams argued the cause for the Participants, with Thomas J. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 1:19 am
In ITV v TV CatchUp [2011] EWHC 2977 (Pat), which was handed down the day of the debate and which the IPKat reported here, Floyd J applied FAPL in the UK to say that the position on the temporary copies exception is acte clair as set out in FAPL, which would seem to contradict NLA v Meltwater. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 4:30 am
B.J. 18 (April 2006) Shiela B. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 4:30 am
B.J. 18 (April 2006) Shiela B. [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 5:01 pm
In its interlocutory decision T 1068/07 of 25 June 2010, Board 3.3.08 referred the following question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA): Does a disclaimer infringe A 123(2) if its subject-matter was disclosed as an embodiment of the invention in the application as filed? [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 10:35 am
However, it will be fun to see how the distinction Floyd J makes between mobile phone access and land line access will work in practice"]. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 12:33 am
Floyd J’s latest decision in the matter was handed down yesterday. [read post]
26 May 2011, 2:02 am
Floyd J dismissed the claimants' action. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 8:30 am
Further, in view of the refusal of Floyd J and of the Deputy Judge to adjourn the trial, I do not think that Mrs Pritchard has put forward a good reason for not attending the trial. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 8:30 am
Further, in view of the refusal of Floyd J and of the Deputy Judge to adjourn the trial, I do not think that Mrs Pritchard has put forward a good reason for not attending the trial. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 5:33 am
Rejecting this argument, Floyd J noted that:[169] “Mr Trickett was responsible for introducing the two-pot process at LUPUK. [read post]
