Search for: "Arnold v. Smith " Results 61 - 80 of 220
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Feb 2015, 6:31 am
Its reasoning for so holding is entirely consistent with the approach to section 60(2) laid down by the Court of Appeal in this country in Grimme v Scott and KCI v Smith & Nephew (see my previous judgment at [102]).Fourthly, the Court took into account (at [4.34]-[4.36]) the fact that Sun had not taken steps which it could have taken, but this does not appear to have been critical to its reasoning. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 6:06 am
Arnold, 280 Ga. 487, 489(5), 629 S.E.2d 807 (Georgia Supreme Court 2006) (citations and punctuation omitted).Smith v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 8:43 am by Huw Morris
At the end of last month, the long-awaited judgment in the Interflora v Marks and Spencer case on trade mark infringement as it relates to keyword advertising was delivered by Mr Justice Arnold. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 3:44 am
” Birss J endorsed Arnold J’s approach in reaching a similar conclusion in HTC v Gemalto [2013] EWHC 1876 (Pat). [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 3:36 pm
 Thankfully, GuestKat Eibhlin Vardy will soon be reporting on the Court of Appeal's decision in Napp v Dr Reddy where the Court upheld Mr Justice Arnold's construction (see the first instance report by wonderful Kat friend Amy Crouch here). [read post]
17 Aug 2010, 9:42 am by Meg Martin
Arnold, Judge.Representing Dougherty: Diane M. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 9:00 am
Mr Justice Arnold took the audience through the background of the case and the pleadings from both Sky and SkyKick. [read post]
27 May 2016, 3:02 am
 Highlights include:Lambretta v Teddy Smith, where Etherton J in the High Court ruled that there was no design right or copyright in the colourways of a track topJacobson & Sons v Globe GB was a trade mark case relating to the flash on the side of Gola shoes - the registrations were held by Etherton J to be valid and infringedIn Cook Biotech Incorporated v Edwards Lifesciences AG, Etherton LJ in the Court of Appeal gave the leading judgment rejecting… [read post]
3 Oct 2017, 1:03 pm by Mark Walsh
There is some extra wattage here this morning for arguments in one of the marquee cases of the new term, Gill v. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 1:10 pm
Arnold, Judge.Representing Appellant (Defendant): Dion J. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 11:44 pm
Retromark Volume V: the last six months in trade marks1. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 10:48 pm
Researching the answer In KCI v Smith & Nephew [2010] EWHC 1487 (Pat), Arnold J held that information that would be acquired by the skilled person as a matter of routine can, in addition to CGK, be taken into account in considering inventive step. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 12:00 am
  The Court of Appeal reiterated the approach to construction of numerical features and ranges in patent claims as set out in paragraph 38 of Smith & Nephew plc v ConvaTec Technologies Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 607. [read post]
24 Jun 2008, 12:27 am
The case is Video Software Dealers Association v. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 1:24 am
Arnold, Judge.Representing Appellant Royball: Diane M. [read post]