Search for: "Royalty Service Corporation v. United States"
Results 1 - 20
of 157
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2010, 1:51 pm
The patents-in-suit are United States Patent No. 5,895,468, entitled "System Automating Delivery Of Professional Services"United States Patent No. 6,182,078, entitled "System For Delivering Professional Services Over The Internet"Download a copy of the complaint here (link)Hat tip: Docket Report [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 4:39 am
In Hunt v. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 12:51 am
Candidate and Researcher in the IP Unit at the University of Cape Town) referencing the copyright infringement case against Multichoice, a provider of cable TV services in Nigeria where the court awarded damages in the sum of N6b ($16.6m)According to Desmond:The 8-year legal tussle in the Federal High Court (FHC) between Multichoice Nigeria Limited (MNL) and Musical Copyright Society Nigeria (MCSN) (Suit No.: FHC/L/CS/1091/11) over royalties for the use of musical… [read post]
16 Apr 2008, 5:00 am
").Consider also a business model where the trademark owner manufactures in a foreign country and transfers title outside of the United States. [read post]
19 Mar 2009, 1:35 pm
In its suit, O'Donnell's company emphasizes its "extensive United States patent protection" for its trading tools. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 7:22 am
(Review of Ian Bremmer, The End of the Free Market: Who Wins the War Between States and Corporations? [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 5:00 pm
Obama, President of the United States, et al. [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 6:43 am
Verizon Services Corporation v. [read post]
5 Oct 2020, 10:25 am
United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 19-8844. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 1:45 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 1:45 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2012, 2:43 am
The Apple-Samsung award needs to be adjusted here and there, but the CMU-Marvell award must simply be tossed or slashed in order to protect the innovation economy against patent unreasonableness.The cross-appeal of Judge Posner's Apple v. [read post]
29 Jul 2022, 6:00 am
Purposeful Direction in a Forum Activates the Long Arm of the Law — Analysis of an important decision from the Ninth Circuit that allows copyright owners to pursue offshore infringers who purposefully direct their infringing activities to the United States. [read post]
25 May 2021, 2:55 am
GILTI is meant to ensure that, regardless of where a U.S. company does business in the world, its foreign subsidiaries pay at least a minimum rate of income tax, if not to other countries, then to the United States. [read post]
16 May 2013, 8:00 pm
AU Optronics Corporation v. [read post]
3 May 2018, 3:44 am
Prior to the passage of the TCJA, the United States was one of six nations that had a worldwide corporate tax system. [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 4:01 pm
This case relates to the Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich (ETH) offering a document delivery service for scientific articles which includes scanning and online forwarding.* Kimble v Marvel Entertainment: when post-expiry patent royalties meet stare decisisThe unsatisfying U.S. [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 4:36 am
He is being held in a high security prison in Västervik, although he recently requested a transfer to a lower safety class unit. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 6:44 am
”[8] The Louisiana expense attribution provisions outlined above are based on federal tax provisions aimed at preventing United States taxpayers from claiming deductions for amounts incurred to generate income not included in federal taxable income by the United States.[9] There are two Internal Revenue Code (“Code”) provisions on which the Louisiana law is based: Section 265, which addresses the treatment of interest expense… [read post]
7 Oct 2018, 1:01 am
"I agree--but why did Huawei ask the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to make a global FRAND determination in its dispute with Samsung? [read post]
