Search for: "Wellness Indicators, Inc." Results 1641 - 1660 of 7,770
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Mar 2013, 1:13 pm by WIMS
Strong evidence indicates tar sands oil threatens pipeline integrity. [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 2:26 am
These questions arose in connection with this Kat’s perusal of the recent decision of the EU General Court (Seventh Chamber) given on October 2, 2013, in The Cartoon Network, Inc. v OHIM and another (Case T-285/12),here, which inter alia addressed the issue of coexistence.As a matter of practice, and depending upon the jurisdiction, the thinking behind an inquiry into coexistence is that, if the two marks coexist in various jurisdictions, it should be an indication of an… [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 4:20 pm by David Jensen
Cetuximab is a monoclonal antibody drug that is used for treatment of certain types of colorectal cancer as well as head and neck cancer. [read post]
21 Feb 2017, 8:14 pm by Larry
The latest of which is Well Luck Co., Inc. v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 4:59 am by Florian Mueller
After Microsoft felt forced for procedural reasons to add Google Inc. to a German patent infringement action originally brought only against its Motorola Mobility subsidiary, a Microsoft v. [read post]
6 Nov 2012, 12:08 pm by WIMS
 [#Solid, #Haz, #P2] GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental ProfessionalsWaste Information & Management Services, Inc. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 1:13 pm by WIMS
Strong evidence indicates tar sands oil threatens pipeline integrity. [read post]
8 Nov 2020, 12:01 pm by Wally Zimolong
Compro Distributing, Inc., 901 A.2d 570, 575 (Pa. [read post]
8 Jan 2020, 10:03 pm
First, the Board considered Feist Publications, Inc., v. [read post]
2 Aug 2023, 10:39 am by Unknown
As a result, plaintiffs’ counsel was awarded $266.7 million based on an indicative award of 26.67 percent, with a $50,000 lead plaintiff incentive bonus to be paid from the fee award (In re Dell Technologies Inc. [read post]
19 Dec 2013, 4:56 pm
(Enlarged Board of Appeal in G2/98).Priority can be lost by:narrowing down the disclosure from the priority document in a manner which the invention could not be derived directly and unambiguously from it (Pharmacia Corp v Merck & Co Inc [2002] RPC 41); orwidening or generalizing from the priority disclosure (Beloit Technologies Inc and another v Valmet Paper Machinery Inc and another [1995] RPC 7005 and Unilin)The story continues in Part II. [read post]
6 Apr 2021, 3:28 am
” In re SnoWizard, Inc., 129 USPQ2d at 1005 (TTAB 2018) (quoting Converse, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Feb 2015, 3:13 am by Amy Howe
The February sitting is now well underway. [read post]