Search for: "Mann v. Mann"
Results 141 - 160
of 1,385
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Feb 2021, 9:52 am
In re Mann, 47 F.2d 370 (C.C.P.A. 1931) (applying double patenting to applications of different inventors) McCreary v. [read post]
12 Feb 2021, 12:20 pm
" (Fontani v. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 1:16 am
A Person using a Juul DeviceAuthor Sarah Johnson Licence CC BY 2,0 Source Wikipedia Juul Jane LambertPatents Court (Mr Justice Mann) Juul Labs, Inc and others v MFP Enterprises Ltd (t/a 'Smoke Nation' and others) [2020] EWHC 3380 (Pat) (10 Dec 2020)This was an application for summary as well as default judgment against defendants that had not acknowledged service of the claim form or particulars [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 11:20 am
The expert committee shall comprise Bhupinder Singh Mann (the National President of Bhartiya Kisan Union and All India Kisan Coordination Committee), Dr. [read post]
6 Jan 2021, 3:11 am
The court correctly determined that the complaint is devoid of allegations from which it could be inferred that any negligence by defendants in their handling of the family court proceeding was the “but for” causation of any damages (see Dweck Law Firm v Mann, 283 AD2d 292, 293 [1st Dept 2001]; see also Phillips-Smith Specialty Retail Group II v Parker Chapin Flattau & Klimpl, 265 AD2d 208, 210 [1st Dept 1999], lv denied 94 NY2d 759 [2000]). [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 11:35 am
Mann, 690 So.2d 649 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). [read post]
13 Dec 2020, 1:04 pm
Mann Found. for Sci. [read post]
8 Dec 2020, 6:02 am
The first and third questionsIn terms of assessing ‘genuine use’, the CJEU first noted that, according to Ansul BV v Ajax Brandbeveiliging BV (C–40/01), the fact that a mark is not used for goods newly available on the market but rather for goods that were sold in the past does not mean that its use is not genuine. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 11:52 am
The case is Catlett v. [read post]
29 Nov 2020, 4:13 pm
As already mentioned, on 26 and 27 November 2020 Mann J heard another CMC in the phone hacking case of Various Claimants v MGN Ltd. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 6:30 am
Not James Mann: The Mann Act’s Marbury Moment, which appears as 10 Journal of Law 105 (2020):James Mann (LC)In Caminetti v. [read post]
6 Nov 2020, 2:24 pm
Mann, 283 A.D.2d 292, 293 (1st Dep’t 2002). [read post]
2 Nov 2020, 3:34 am
“Moreover, the plaintiff failed to plead specific factual allegations showing that, had he not settled, he would have obtained a more favorable outcome” (Schiller v Bender, Burrows & Rosenthal, LLP, 116 AD3d 756, 758; see Keness v Feldman, Kramer & Monaco, P.C., 105 AD3d at 813; Tortura v Sullivan Papain Block McGrath & Cannavo, P.C., 21 AD3d at 1083; Dweck Law Firm v Mann, 283 AD2d 292, 293; Rau v… [read post]
1 Nov 2020, 4:35 pm
In Gorham et al. v. [read post]
29 Oct 2020, 8:33 am
Here, Mann filed this patent case back in 2007 and finally got to trial in 2014. [read post]
27 Oct 2020, 2:43 am
Jane Lambert Patents Court (Sir Alistair Norris) Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and another v Archos SA and others [2020] EWHC 2641 (Pat) (9 Oct 2020)In these proceedings, Sir Alistair Norris was asked to vary a confidentiality order that had been made by Mr Justice Mann at a case management conference on 22 July 2020. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 9:51 am
Canney v. [read post]
11 Oct 2020, 4:31 pm
As already mentioned, on the same day there was a CMC in the case of Various Claimants v MGN Ltd before Mann J. [read post]
5 Oct 2020, 10:25 am
Mann Foundation for Scientific Research, et al., No. 20-362 Notice and Damages: Arctic Cat Inc. v. [read post]
4 Oct 2020, 4:04 pm
In the case of Chopak v. [read post]
