Search for: "STATE v VISSER"
Results 141 - 160
of 212
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Feb 2020, 5:39 am
” The Federal Circuit construed the language consistently with the protocol described in the specification (SIPCO, LLC v. [read post]
17 Jan 2020, 8:56 am
The decision directs us to Lewison J’s comment in Ivax Pharmaceuticals v Akzo Nobel NV [2006] which states that “obstacles to regulatory approval….are not relevant obstacles to an obviousness attack”. [read post]
16 Jan 2020, 11:29 pm
The impact of Huawei v ZTE Since the seminal 2015 CJEU case of Huawei v ZTE (the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (Case C-170/13 Huawei Technologies, EU:C:2015:477)) the importance of a harmonised approach to FRAND across EU member states has become obvious. [read post]
13 Jan 2020, 5:41 am
In another articlecited by EPI, authored by Derk Visser, it is argued that all three criteria listed in the guidelines are inconsistent with recent case law on novelty. [read post]
28 Dec 2019, 2:15 am
Case date: 05 December 2019 Case number: No. 18-1363 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law. [read post]
29 Nov 2019, 11:23 pm
Oude Elferink, Exploring the future of the institutional landscape of the oceans beyond national jurisdiction Ronán Long, Restoring marine environmental damage: Can the Costa Rica v Nicaragua compensation case influence the BBNJ negotiations? [read post]
25 Nov 2019, 2:34 am
” Judge Dyk would hear the decisions on the merits, rather than vacate them for a new hearing before a new panel below (BedGear, LLC v. [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 10:59 pm
Agata Kleczkowska, The Misconception About the Term “Intervention by Invitation” Laura Visser, What’s in a Name? [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 5:48 am
Are the UPCA and the ratification laws compatible with the State’s duty to protect constitutional identity? [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 2:43 am
For instance, in Imar v. [read post]
22 Oct 2019, 9:09 am
Case date: 20 September 2019 Case number: No. 18-2388 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 9:56 am
” The recent judgment of 12 September 2019 (case C-688/12, Bayer Pharma AG v. [read post]
6 Oct 2019, 6:02 am
This means that it was null and of no effect: see, if authority were needed, R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, para 119. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 1:06 am
Filing and examination fee discounts extended to joint applicants A 30% reduction for the filing and examination fees is available for entitled applicants such as SMEs, natural persons and universities from an EPC contracting state having an official language different from one of the official languages of the EPO. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 12:50 am
Finally, the Board did not abuse its discretion by declining to consider an untimely argument made by the petitioner (Henny Penny Corporation v. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 2:10 am
The referral, but unfortunately not the referred question, has now been answered by the CJEU with its order in Eli Lilly v. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 1:00 pm
The second referral, Sandoz v. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 1:53 am
Case date: 27 August 2019 Case number: No. 17-2472 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law. [read post]
1 Sep 2019, 6:47 am
The Board’s obviousness finding predicated on erroneous claim construction was reversed and the case remanded (MTD Products Inc. v. [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 12:32 am
Cristalia used the expert report and civil procedure rules to state that it would be illegal to decide a case against the evidence produced. [read post]
