Search for: "MARVEL ENTERTAINMENT LLC" Results 41 - 60 of 69
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Sep 2009, 1:24 am
Dewey, Paul Hastings Lead Multibillion-Dollar Disney-Marvel Deal The American Lawyer Dewey & LeBoeuf and Paul Hastings have landed leading roles on Walt Disney's $4 billion cash and stock acquisition of Marvel Entertainment, a deal that gives Disney the rights to more than 5,000 Marvel characters, including Iron Man and the Incredible Hulk. [read post]
21 Oct 2015, 5:31 pm by Shahid Buttar
But as the center of both the tech and entertainment sectors, and the world's seventh largest economy, California's decision to limit police authorities and reinforce individual rights packs a political punch. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 7:11 pm
Realtime Data, LLC d/b/a IXO (Chicago IP Litigation Blog) District Court N D Illinois: False marking false marking false marking all at up to $500 per offense: Simonian v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 7:11 pm
Realtime Data, LLC d/b/a IXO (Chicago IP Litigation Blog) District Court N D Illinois: False marking false marking false marking all at up to $500 per offense: Simonian v. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 11:33 am by Patent Arcade Staff
Sony Computer Entertainment America, SETTLED (E.D. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 11:57 am by Michael Kimberly
Marvel Entertainment, LLC Enterprises Inc., that it is “a foundation stone of the rule of law. [read post]
12 Jul 2015, 5:55 am by SHG
Copyright © 2015 Simple Justice NY, LLC This feed is for personal, non-commercial and Newstex use only. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 1:01 pm by Mark Walsh
Marvel Entertainment LLC, an intellectual-property dispute over a Spiderman toy in which the superhero was not mentioned even once during a legally dense oral argument (though Spiderman did make a playful cameo in Justice Elena Kagan’s eventual opinion in the case). [read post]
1 Jul 2021, 8:48 am by Lisa Larrimore Ouellette
Marvel Entertainment, LLC, 576 U.S. 446 (2015) (re-affirming prohibition on post-patent-expiration royalties, with some “safe harbor” practices advocated to soften the impact of the doctrine); Stanford University v. [read post]
22 May 2019, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Marvel Entertainment, LLC four years ago: “an argument that we got something wrong—even a good argument to that effect—cannot by itself justify scrapping settled precedent. [read post]
3 May 2010, 3:01 am
’ not descriptive as a matter of law: Zobmondo Entertainment, LLC v. [read post]