Search for: "LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL V. IMPRESSION PRODUCTS " Results 61 - 80 of 133
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2017, 9:55 pm by Patent Docs
March 21, 2017 - "USPTO Examiner Interview Strategies: Preparing for and Conducting Interviews to Advance Patent Prosecution" (Strafford) - 1:00 to 2:30 pm (EDT) March 21, 2017 - Post-argument discussion on Impression Products, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 12:36 pm
Lexmark International, Inc.At issue in Impression v. [read post]
31 Jan 2017, 8:41 am by Dennis Crouch
by Dennis Crouch The first rounds of merits briefs have now been submitted to the Supreme Court in Impression Prods. v. [read post]
30 May 2017, 1:26 pm by Gene Quinn
This decision will encourage powerful foreign groups to gather products up... [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 1:30 am by Jani Ihalainen
Many IP practitioners have been waiting for the decision by the Supreme Court, who released it only some weeks ago.By way of a brief primer, the case of Impression Products Inc. v Lexmark International Inc. concerned the resale of printer ink cartridges, for which Lexmark owned several patents, which they also designed and manufactured. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 12:11 pm by Christine Corcos
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2013), and is likely to reappear and influence the Court in a patent case in which it has recently granted certiorari, Impression Products, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 12:11 pm
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2013), and is likely to reappear and influence the Court in a patent case in which it has recently granted certiorari, Impression Products, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Feb 2016, 11:17 pm by Mark Summerfield
Back in November 2015 I wrote on the topic of ‘international patent exhaustion’ in anticipation of a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in the case of Lexmark v Impression Products. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 7:19 pm by Dennis Crouch
  Ordinarily these authorized “first sales” would exhaust Lexmark’s patent rights in the cartridges, such that Lexmark could not sue third parties, such as Impression Products, Inc., for patent infringement when they refill and resell the spent cartridges at a reduced price. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 4:18 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
This week, oral arguments were heard in the case of Impression Products, Inc. v. [read post]