Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
For the purpose of calculating damages in a patent infringement action, the infringing "article of manufacture" may be defined as either an end product sold to a consumer or as a component of that product. 35 U.S.C. §289: The relevant text of the Patent Act encompasses both an end product sold to a consumer as well as a component of that product.
Unlike the jury in Google's trial in San Francisco, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers largely sided with Apple in an 185-decision that defined the Play Store and Apple's iPhone app store ...
Google's lawyer argued to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that a trial judge made legal errors in the antitrust case that unfairly benefited Epic Games.
Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González was a decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union holding that an internet search engine operator is responsible for the processing that it carries out of personal information which appears on web pages published by third parties. [7] [8 ...
Held that an assignee of a geographically limited patent right could not bring an action in the assignee's own name. Now obsolete. Hotchkiss v. Greenwood - Supreme Court, 1850. Introduced the concept of non-obviousness as patentability requirement in U.S. patent law. Le Roy v. Tatham - Supreme Court, 1852. "It is admitted that a principle is ...
List of decisions and opinions of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office; List of decisions of the EPO Boards of Appeal relating to Article 52(2) and (3) EPC; List of UK judgments relating to excluded subject matter; List of United States patent law cases; List of trademark case law; List of copyright case law
United States v. Google LLC is an ongoing federal antitrust case brought by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) against Google LLC on January 24, 2023. [2] The suit accuses Google of illegally monopolizing the advertising technology (adtech) market in violation of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A U.S. appeals court on Monday threw out a $2.18 billion patent-infringement award won by patent owner VLSI Technology against Intel Corp, overturning one of the largest ...