Search for: "In re Decker"
Results 161 - 180
of 226
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Dec 2009, 7:08 am
See also Decker v. [read post]
7 Dec 2009, 8:03 am
But we're sure that some people see it that way. [read post]
2 Dec 2009, 6:05 am
Litigators are especially fallible to the Black & Decker error that Richard Susskind cites, failing to see that the customer wants not a drill, but a hole in the board, in the easiest, cheapest way possible. [read post]
30 Nov 2009, 7:43 am
See also Decker v. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 9:32 pm
I think it was the key-head shape in In re The Black & Decker Corp., 81 USPQ2d 1841 (TTAB 2006) [TTABlogged here], but there the only issue was acquired distinctiveness. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 12:25 pm
Dynamic Lighting (light fixture); Deckers v. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 12:25 pm
Dynamic Lighting (light fixture); Deckers v. [read post]
4 Nov 2009, 8:02 am
Though we often read filings several times just to make sure we’re reading (and interpreting them) correctly, we honestly did a double-take when we read the 8-K that Black and Decker (BDK) filed late yesterday. [read post]
8 Oct 2009, 9:42 am
As such, the only option was to file a lawsuit to compel them to re-open the file. [read post]
30 Sep 2009, 3:01 pm
On litigation, we’re doing well. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
Black & Decker Corp., 2005 WL 697479, at *7 (E.D. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
Black & Decker Corp., 2005 WL 697479, at *7 (E.D. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
Black & Decker Corp., 2005 WL 697479, at *7 (E.D. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 5:09 am
Black & Decker Corp., 2005 WL 697479, at *7 (E.D. [read post]
16 Aug 2009, 9:51 pm
However, this issue was not before the court in Black & Decker and, in any event, Black & Decker was distinguished because there the jury found that several of the claims asserted were in fact invalid. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 5:13 am
Well, you're notalone. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 5:13 am
Well, you're notalone. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 1:38 pm
Decker, No. 102 Defendant's murder conviction is affirmed where: 1) although there had been a 15-year delay in re-indicting Defendant after the charges were initially dropped, the delay was justified by the witnesses' fear of testifying against Defendant; and 2) Defendant was not prejudiced by the delay. [read post]
30 May 2009, 5:41 am
Decker and Jason Eberl, eds. 2008).Star Trek and Sacred Ground (Jennifer Porter, ed.; 2000).Star Trek Visions of Law and Justice (Robert H. [read post]
27 May 2009, 8:46 am
Build a triple-decker in my neighborhood? [read post]
