Search for: "Converse, Inc. v. International Trade Commission"
Results 1 - 20
of 93
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Oct 2014, 6:00 am
Reports peg the number as at least 22 separate lawsuits against more than 30 companies, both in district court and at the International Trade Commission (the “ITC”). [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 8:02 am
Converse v. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 1:20 pm
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Oct. 30, 2018, Converse, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
Inc., 448 F. [read post]
18 May 2022, 5:00 pm
Cedar Petrochemicals, Inc., 760 F. [read post]
14 May 2012, 6:45 am
Bryan Wilson of Morrison & Foerster's Palo Alto office spoke about the pros and cons of litigating a trade secrets claim before the International Trade Commission (ITC). [read post]
3 Jan 2020, 1:27 pm
Corp., 97 N.Y.2d 195, 199 (2001); see also Duane Reade Inc. v. [read post]
27 Apr 2015, 3:56 am
The drafters of the motion have now prepared a detailed reply to Wouter's comments, which is handily summarised in this post.* When three is company: trilogue happy with proposed EU trade mark reformsWondering what might be the fate of the European Commission's proposals for trade mark reform? [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 3:40 am
Internationial Trade Commission, 128 USPQ2d 1538, 1546 (Fed. [read post]
25 Jul 2023, 9:29 am
”Individual State & International Organization’s Ethics CodesSeveral individual state and international organizations also have their own code on this topic. [read post]
23 May 2017, 1:06 am
Ultimately, following the Jazz Photo Corp. v International Trade Commission case, the Court determined that no legal rule to this effect existed. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 10:36 am
After a study prepared for the European Commission identified substantial perceived weaknesses in the trade secrets protections afforded by the laws of many Member States, the European Commission announced a proposal for a Directive on trade secrets that, if enacted, will substantially alter the legal landscape in Europe regarding trade secret protection and will enhance cross-border certainty within the EU. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 1:58 pm
Class V stock was a publicly traded “tracking stock” that tracked the performance of VMware, Inc. [read post]
19 Sep 2008, 12:05 pm
Indeed, respondents essentially concede that if an entity is a "public body" for purposes of the OML, it is a public "agency" for purposes of FOIL (see generally Perez, 5 NY3d at 528), although the converse is not necessarily true (see Citizens for Alternatives to Animal Labs, Inc. v Board of Trustees of State Univ. of New York, 92 NY2d 357, 362 [1998]). [read post]
3 Aug 2014, 11:34 am
AVENTURA TENNIS, LLC, INC., Appellee. 3rd District.Injury LawAdams, et al. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 10:33 am
” Cel-Tech Commc’ns, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2023, 9:45 am
Thus, for instance, the government cannot "afford[] a greater degree of protection to commercial than to noncommercial speech," Metromedia, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Oct 2018, 11:28 am
We had a guest post in this blog providing a descriptive comment on the decision of the two judge Bench in Union of India v Hardy Exploration & Production (India) Inc (2018: SCI)("Hardy I") referring the matter to a larger Bench of the Supreme Court. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 11:05 pm
Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Limited (Australian Trade Marks Law Blog) What happens when an opponent stops opposing: Delnorth Pty Ltd v Dura-Post (Aust) Pty Ltd (ipwars) Urgent interlocutory and declaratory relief: AED Oil Limited & Anor v Puffin FPSO Limited (ipwars) Infringement of copyright in musical works: a riff Down Under: Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd v EMI Songs Australia Pty Limited (JIPLP) Austria Austria: opposition… [read post]
29 Nov 2009, 3:57 pm
Knowing this possibility may hinder the Attorney-Client relationships because the company may be afraid to disclose certain conversations regarding, for instance, the company’s questionable antitrust and securities activities to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for fear that the DOJ will pass along the information to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). [read post]
