Search for: "Leo v. Leo" Results 1 - 20 of 948
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 May 2009, 4:26 pm
In Leo Pharma (a/s Leo Laboratories Ltd) v Sandoz Ltd [2009] EWHC 996 (Pat) (15 May 2009) the defendant admitted that it had infringed the patent in suit but contended that the patent was invalid for lack of novelty and obviousness. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 2:15 am by Haskell Murray
In this interview, Delaware Supreme Court Chief Justice Leo Strine singles out C & J Energy Services, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Aug 2015, 8:22 am by Daily Record Staff
Criminal law — Sufficiency of the evidence — Possession of oxycodone Following a jury trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, appellant, Leo D. [read post]
5 Oct 2016, 8:50 am by Daily Record Staff
Criminal procedure — Motion to suppress testimony — Meaning of rap lyrics A jury in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County convicted Leo Brown, Appellant, of possession of marijuana and resisting arrest. [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 3:43 am by michael
Leo Pharma A/S and another v Sandoz Ltd; [2010] EWHC 1911 (Pat); [2010] WLR (D) 214 “A sealed court order which had been drawn up and agreed by the parties at the request of the court could not be corrected under the slip rule contained in CPR 40.12(1) unless it had an unintended effect which was inconsistent with the intention of the court. [read post]
21 Mar 2007, 12:03 pm
Over at the TTABlog, John Welch has a report about what appears to be the final chapter in notorious "intellectual property entrepreneur" Leo Stoller's fight with Google over the rights to the Google trademark. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 6:36 am by Ross Pfund, Jr.
In the upcoming issue of New England Super Lawyers, writer Nick DiUlio profiles cover subject Leo V. [read post]
15 Sep 2013, 9:00 pm by Rodger Citron
” Subsequently, in fact, the Court adopted this broader view eight years later in Moore v. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 9:33 am
If, however, there is some doubt about whether the actual form of compound claimed would result from the described process, it needs to be determined whether following the process would inevitably arrive at the claimed compound.This was the situation in Leo Pharma v Sandoz EWCA Civ 1188, which was decided by Lords Justice Jacob and Patten yesterday (17 November), on appeal from Floyd J's decision in the High Court earlier this year ([2009] EWHC 996 (Pat)). [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 2:07 am
Here is an Olathe News article reporting that prosecutors dropped charges without prejudice in State v. [read post]