Search for: "E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Co." Results 81 - 100 of 168
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Apr 2021, 4:31 pm by Sean Wajert
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc., 994 F.3d 791 (7th Cir. 2021). [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 4:16 am by Jon L. Gelman
Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 118 N.J.L. 404, 193 A. 194 (1937), aff'd 119 N.J.L. 427, 197 A. 276 (Err. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 7:29 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
E.I. du Pont De Nemours & Co., 750 F.2d 1569, 1580 (Fed. [read post]
22 Oct 2015, 3:38 pm by Nikki Siesel
The Board evaluated whether there was a likelihood of confusion by looking at the thirteen factors identified in In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973). [read post]
29 Aug 2014, 4:00 am by Jon Gelman
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Justice announced today a settlement with E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (DuPont) at its Belle, W. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 4:30 am by Jim Dedman
" Mars, for its part, appealed the verdict, arguing the trial court erred by qualifying Beauregarde as an expert under E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2009, 10:30 pm by D. Todd Smith
Update 7/6/09: On my initial pass through last week's orders, I missed another related case, In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. (08-0625), which was decided without oral argument. [read post]
20 Jul 2016, 5:01 am by Moll Law Group, Ltd
The plaintiff alleged that DuPont (E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co.), which sells products including Teflon, Stainmaster carpet, and Gore-tex, continuously dumped carcinogenic waste into the Ohio River, and the company tried to conceal the dangers of C-8. [read post]
13 Jan 2020, 4:32 pm by Nikki Siesel
In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (CCPA 1973). [read post]
14 Jun 2017, 8:27 am by Greg Mersol
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 636 F.3d 88 (4th Cir. 2011), while the Ninth and Second Circuits had allowed such tactics. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 3:13 pm by Kalvis Golde
A list of this week’s featured petitions is below: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. [read post]
28 Aug 2018, 3:09 pm by James Hastings
   In Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion cases,  the plaintiff must establish the presence of a likelihood of confusion between the parties’ trademarks pursuant to the thirteen factors set forth in the case of In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973). [read post]
5 Jul 2009, 10:30 pm by D. Todd Smith
Update 7/6/09: On my initial pass through last week's orders, I missed another related case, In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. (08-0625), which was decided without oral argument. [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 11:26 pm
., E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 8:57 am by Tiffany Blofield
In determining whether there was a likelihood of confusion, the Board, as usual, applied the factors identified in the In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357 (CCPA 1973). [read post]