Search for: "John v. Duffy"
Results 21 - 40
of 213
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 May 2020, 6:57 am
Tejinder Singh of Goldstein & Russell and John Duffy of the University of Virginia School of Law will talk about the argument and what the case may mean for trademarks in marketing and advertising. [read post]
30 Apr 2020, 11:11 am
Tejinder Singh of Goldstein & Russell and John Duffy of the University of Virginia School of Law led a discussion for undergraduate students on how the case relates to trademarks in marketing and advertising. [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 6:26 am
Booking.com Tejinder Singh, Goldstein & Russell | John Duffy, University of Virginia School of Law Preview: April 30, 12 p.m. [read post]
22 Apr 2020, 3:46 am
” Briefly: John Duffy has this blog’s opinion analysis in Thryv v. [read post]
2 Apr 2020, 8:54 am
Merges & John F. [read post]
26 Mar 2020, 3:54 pm
John Duffy and I argued that such "speculative patents" should be patentable only if they meaningfully accelerate the arrival of technologies. [read post]
23 Mar 2020, 3:04 pm
However, Prof John Duffy shook that cage in his 2007 article: Are Administrative Patent Judges Unconstitutional? [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 4:42 pm
Source disclosure In R v McCrory (co-accused Duffy and Fitzsimons) [2019] NICC 3 an application was brought against the Sunday World Newspaper by a defendant who had been charged with a number of offences (including attempted murder, directing terrorism and membership of a proscribed organisation.) [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 9:30 pm
Georgia v. [read post]
11 Dec 2019, 4:05 am
John Duffy analyzes Monday’s second argument, in Thryv v. [read post]
9 Dec 2019, 3:50 am
This blog’s preview came from John Duffy. [read post]
20 Nov 2019, 7:09 am
“If you go back to Marbury v. [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 10:31 am
We have a law professor heavy panel with Professors John Duffy, Arti Rai, and John Whealan along with Bob Armitage (who tends to speak like a professor). [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 7:10 am
All parties agreed, as did the panel (citing Professor John Duffy’s prominent 2007 Patently-O paper), that APJs are officers within the meaning of the Appointments Clause. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 12:30 pm
(Cole.pdf) John F. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 7:57 am
John Duffy’s paper that started this whole process: John F. [read post]
18 Oct 2019, 4:00 am
Rational Ignorance at the Patent Office, John F. [read post]
18 Sep 2019, 9:06 am
(Cole.pdf) John F. [read post]
15 Jun 2019, 12:21 am
Schaefer, LLC, Smithtown, NY, for appellant.Devitt Spellman Barrett, LLP, Smithtown, NY (John M. [read post]
22 Apr 2019, 2:02 pm
(Cole.pdf) John F. [read post]
