Search for: "G M v. Review Board" Results 101 - 120 of 373
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jul 2011, 11:34 am by Jeff Gamso
S. 463 (1993), relevant mitigating evidence to be disregarded, see, e. g., Johnson v. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 3:00 am
(Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) Understanding the risk that a judgment for wilful IP infringement may be discharged in bankruptcy (IP Spotlight) As a litigator, Judge Sotomayor handled many trade mark matters (Seattle Trademark Lawyer) Obama Administration confirms support for continuing ACTA negotiations (Michael Geist) (Intellectual Property Watch)   US General – Decisions District Court N D Illinois orders production of allegedly privileged documents after in camera… [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 3:51 am
(IP finance) The UK IP Office issues a Virgin trademark ruling that contrasts the Israel approach (IP Factor) EWHC (Pat): Article 27 (to prevent parallel proceedings in different member states) requires flexible approach to meaning of ‘same parties’: Mölnlycke Health Care AB (MAB), Mölnlycke Health care Limited (MUK) v. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 7:18 am
G-2/08 (PatLit) MARQUES and other organisation take united position on the Cooperation Fund (Class 46) EU communication on future of competition law framework for motor vehicle sector (BLOG@IP::JUR) EU ‘Friends of the Presidency Group’ discussing non-agricultural geographic indications (BLOG@IP::JUR) Scents and sense – or perfumes for peanuts? [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 4:00 am by Administrator
Judicial determination of improper conduct requires review of the totality of circumstances. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 2:00 pm
The Board of Appeal’s considerations on the comparison of products were also upheld. [read post]
26 Sep 2008, 11:45 pm
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: WIPO General Assembly opens: New Director-General delivers acceptance speech (IPRoo) (IAM) (WIPO) (WIPO) (WIPO) (IPKat) (WIPO) (Intellectual Property Watch) (Intellectual Property Watch) (Managing Intellectual Property) (WIPO) (IP Menu News) CAFC: 'Point of novelty' design test thrown out; the value of amicus briefs: Egyptian Goddess,… [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 7:18 am by Schachtman
The published case report by Ratner helps demonstrate that Allen v. [read post]
13 Oct 2008, 12:12 pm
Reid and MacKinnon's checklist on protection of IPR in China (IP Dragon) China/Hong Kong: WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty in effect in Hong Kong after PRC (IP Dragon) Protect your IP rights in China (Philip Brooks' Patent Infringement Updates)   Finland M&M and Taloustutkimus survey of most respected brands in Finland (Class 46)   France Electronic filing of trade mark applications (Class 46)  … [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 5:28 pm by Eugene Volokh
"] I'm writing about this both because it strikes me as an interesting example of what litigants sometimes try to do (and occasionally succeed), and also because I thought our readers ought to see what the litigant accused me of—perhaps some of you may agree with her—and see my response. [read post]
24 Aug 2009, 7:01 am
(Tangible IP) Global IP law: Two recent publications ‘Global Challenge of Intellectual Property Rights’ by R Bird and S C Jain and ‘Global Intellectual Property Law’ by G Dutfield and U Suthersanen (IPKat)   Global - Trade Marks / Brands What price brands on the balance sheet? [read post]
14 Aug 2020, 1:21 pm
To take the position that their decision is neither subject to review by a more democratically representative organ of state (however "wrong" they may be) strikes as odd in this context with human rights and democratic legitimacy at its core.3. [read post]
8 Feb 2010, 4:02 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: http://duncanbucknell.com/subscribe/   Highlights this week included: EPO suspends decision on new president (IP Watch) (IP Watch) (IAM) (Innovation Partners) (Managing IP) CAFC: Firm disqualified from representing party on appeal where partner served as opponent’s expert at trial: Outside the Box Innovations, LLC v. [read post]