Search for: "Sharpe v. West Indian Co., Ltd."
Results 1 - 9
of 9
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Dec 2016, 2:58 pm
Permission to appeal in patent cases - farewell to the Pozzoli approachGuest Kat Eibhlin Vardy recaps the case Teva UK Ltd v Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co KG, [2016] EWCA Civ 1296. [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 2:00 pm
Somraj Singh, (not precedential) (TTABlog) US Trade Marks – Lawsuits and strategic steps DJ David Guetta – DJ David Guetta sues over use of name on compilation album cover: Payday Records, Ultra Records v Thrive Records (The Trademark Blog) Stanford University – Stanford University sues Sir Allen Stanford, patron of West Indian cricket, for trade mark infringement (IPKat) [read post]
20 Jan 2019, 11:43 pm
Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 4:51 pm
The Center for Internet and Society has made a submission to the Indian Government on the Draft IT Intermediaries Guidelines. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
12 Feb 2023, 5:03 pm
On 7 February 2023, the Court of Appeal (Sharp P, Singh and Warby LJJ) heard an appeal in the case of Banks v Cadwalladr. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 1:05 am
Millions of millennia ago, in our own Milky Way galaxy, but far upstream of where we are today, two neutron stars spiraled around each other, each embodying the mass of a sun but smaller and faster than a speeding planet. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 9:23 am
Sharpe, c1998 HF1425 .M37 1998 See Catalog Apathy LOSING TWICE: HARMS OF INDIFFERENCE IN THE SUPREME COURT / EMILY M. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 11:49 am
Sharpe, c1998 HF1425 .M37 1998 See Catalog Apathy LOSING TWICE: HARMS OF INDIFFERENCE IN THE SUPREME COURT / EMILY M. [read post]
