Search for: "Cooper v. Craig et al" Results 1 - 20 of 22
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Jan 2008, 11:58 am
Aukerman, et al    Eastern District of Michigan at DetroitDAMON J. [read post]
26 Sep 2010, 10:08 pm by Marie Louise
Lenovo International, et. al. / No, DED Brigham and Women’s Hospital Inc. et al v. [read post]
5 Sep 2011, 5:16 am by New Books Script
Public law : cases, materials and commentary general editors, Neil Craik, Craig Forcese ; contributing editors, Philip Bryden … [et al.]. [read post]
6 Apr 2010, 4:56 am
(GRAY on Claims) District Court E D Texas finds Applied Medical Resources liable for infringement of Covidien’s surgical device patent (Patent Docs) District Court E D Texas limits number of patent claims and prior art references asserted in case: SynQor, Inc v Artesyn Technologies, Inc et al (Docket Report) District Court W D Pennsylvania: Non-practising entity entitled to permanent injunction where infringed patent was the subject of prior exclusive license:… [read post]
4 Nov 2015, 5:11 am
  This week's case under review is Modern Holdings, LLC et al. v. [read post]
24 Aug 2009, 7:01 am
(IPKat)   Portugal PGI status granted to Portuguese sweet potato Batata doce de Aljezur (Class 46)   Serbia Serbia ratifies Vienna Agreement on Figurative Elements of Marks (Class 46) Municipal Court of Nis issues three-month prison sentence and nominal fine to individual found to have infringed copyright in Sony PlayStation games (The IP Factor)   United Kingdom EWHC (Ch): Stella’s NUDE gets the ‘go ahead’: Nude Brands Limited v… [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 2:12 pm
(Chairman Battista and Members Liebman and Walsh participated.) *** Goya Foods of Florida (12-CA-21168, et al.; 350 NLRB No. 74) Miami, FL August 23, 2007. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 1:36 pm
’ paper by Graeme Clark SC (IP Down Under) Full Federal Court decision concerning brand reputation in context of ‘lookalike’ products and famous brands: Hansen Beverage Company v Bickfords (Australia) Pty Ltd (Mallesons Stephen Jaques) Federal Court holds that grace period applicable to a ‘parent patent’ is different to that of its divisional ‘child’: Mont Adventure Equipment v Phoenix Leisure Group (IP Down… [read post]