Search for: "USA v. Alexander" Results 1 - 20 of 123
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Feb 2024, 6:31 am by Linda Panszczyk
As for the injunction, the Fifth Circuit agreed with Rolex that the district court should have enjoined the sale of Rolex watches with non-genuine bezels, thus affirming, as modified, the district court’s injunction in part (Rolex Watch USA, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 5:05 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
Via FAS, there are several dozen documents in this compendium including: On January 6, 2011, the Department of Justice announced the indictment of former CIA officer Jeffrey A. [read post]
12 Oct 2022, 8:20 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
See Jean Alexander Cosmetics, Inc. v. [read post]
., Ltd. and HEC Pharm USA Inc., vacated its prior decision, and reversed the district court’s judgment that the claims of patent at issue were not invalid (Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 6:21 am by Big Tent Democrat
Slovenia - : Samir Handanovic, Bojan Jokic, Marko Suler, Bostjan Cesar, Miso Brecko, Valter Birsa, Robert Koren, Alexander Radosavlevic, Andraz Kirm, Milivoje Novakovic, Zlatko Dedic. [read post]
The board’s claim construction and motivation to combine analysis were supported by the record (Shamoon v. [read post]
While the Sixth Circuit largely affirmed the trial court decision, the appeals court vacated a punitive damages award of $67,650 because the district court gave improper jury instructions (House v. [read post]
But the court, in adopting an expansive reading of a recent Supreme Court precedent, cautioned that the news publication might have a strong defense on the likelihood of confusion analysis (Punchbowl, Inc. v. [read post]
The court, in affirming a district court’s grant of a preliminary injunction freezing sales of the parody shoe, also found that the district court acted within its discretion in weighing the traditional likelihood of confusion factors (Vans, Inc. v. [read post]
The court found that Illinois’ absolute litigation privilege protects Toyo from liability for statements made in settling a prior trade complaint, even though those statements allegedly harmed a competitor not involved in that case (Toyo Tire Corp. v. [read post]
The court also rejected Defendant’s claim of trademark infringement because (1) Plaintiff only used the trademark for promoting NanoBone products, and (2) the sole trademark at issue was the word “NanoBone,” without any stylization, while Plaintiff’s trademarks were stylized variations (Artoss, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jun 2022, 4:03 am by Linda O'Brien (CCH)
Thus, the Board’s decision that the challenged claims of the patent were unpatentable was affirmed (Ethicon LLC v. [read post]
The district court properly exercised its discretion because evidence showed that Avco’s purchases of AVStar’s infringing products were motivated by reasons other than use of infringing trademarks, and Precision provided no evidence to support exemplary remedies (Avco Corp. v. [read post]