Search for: "Doll v. Doll"
Results 41 - 60
of 678
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2012, 8:27 am
2010AP2900 Wisconsin Dolls, LLC, v. [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 1:39 pm
(h/t to Eric Pellenbarg for sending this along today)Mattel, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2009, 6:07 am
CAFC Finds the USPTO Final Rules Limiting Continuations to Conflict With 35 USC 120, But Final Rules Limiting Claims, RCEs, and ESDs are Within USPTO’s Rulemaking Authority. [read post]
1 Jun 2009, 7:54 pm
The US Supreme Court granted certiorari overnight. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 9:18 am
Law Lessons from DEBORAH DOLL V. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 7:49 pm
Tafas v. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 6:22 am
MGA Entertainment, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Apr 2012, 2:43 am
Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 7:51 pm
A jury has ruled in favor of Mattel in the Bratz v. [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 2:45 pm
Doll) until 60 days after the U.S. [read post]
Guest Post: Checking the “Staats” – in Broadening Reissue Practice, We Are Stuck in the “Doll”-drums
6 Mar 2012, 11:28 pm
Cir. 1985)), Buell v. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 6:21 pm
In August 2010, I reported on a hotly contested case between Mattel (maker of Barbie dolls) and MGA Entertainment (maker of Bratz dolls) involving ownership rights in the Bratz line of dolls. [read post]
8 Feb 2018, 11:57 am
I am late to the party on this, but I still thought I would point you to Jill Lepore's recent review in the New Yorker of (among other books) Orly Lobel's You Don't Own Me: How Mattel v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 3:06 pm
Doll). [read post]
10 Jun 2020, 4:08 am
Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2022, 5:20 am
A meme account whose Instagram handle is a bawdy play on 'Kit Kittredge' posted a viral image after Roe v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 3:50 pm
Bratz dolls are no stranger to the blog - we've previously blogged about the Bratz' travails with Barbie. [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 9:13 am
MGA (a/k/a Barbie v. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 8:59 am
By Donald Zuhn -- In a 55-page opinion issued earlier today, the Federal Circuit determined that the four rules at issue in Tafas v. [read post]
