Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Burden of persuasion on infringement in declaratory judgment cases Octane Fitness v. Icon Health & Fitness: 572 U.S. 545: 2014: 9-0: Damages: Attorney Fees: An "exceptional" case is simply one that stands out from others because of its frivolous nature relating to the legal arguments or merits of the claim.
Infringement requires a likelihood of misleading purchasers, not exact similitude; with laches, a court may deny past damages but still enjoin future infringement where infringement is clear. In re Trade-Mark Cases: 100 U.S. 82: 1879: 9–0: Substantive: Constitutional basis for trademark regulation: Majority: Miller (unanimous) Federal ...
Apple and Samsung litigated patent infringement cases in several European nations starting in 2011, with implications for device sales across all of the European Union. [ 75 ] [ 76 ] In August 2011, the Landgericht Court in Germany granted Apple's request for an EU-wide injunction banning Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 device, on the ...
An accounting of profits is proper in a trademark infringement case only where the defendant engages in willful infringement, meaning that the defendant attempted to exploit the value of an established name of another. [45] Alternatively, a plaintiff may recover damages incurred if they show a reasonable forecast of lost profits.
An intellectual property (IP) infringement is the infringement or violation of an intellectual property right. There are several types of intellectual property rights, such as copyrights, patents, trademarks, industrial designs, plant breeders rights [1] and trade secrets. Therefore, an intellectual property infringement may for instance be one ...
Patent infringement is an unauthorized act of - for example - making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing for these purposes a patented product. Where the subject-matter of the patent is a process, infringement involves the act of using, offering for sale, selling or importing for these purposes at least the product obtained by the patented process. [1]
organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and under New York State law, without any parent corporation, that it has issued no stock, and that there thus is no publicly held company that owns any such stock. Case 1:10-cv-01067-RBW-DAR Document 212 Filed 12/14/12 Page 2 of 38
Apple Inc. litigation (multiple, multinational cases) Apple v. HTC (US, 2010) Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (multiple, multinational cases, ongoing [citation needed]) Ariad v. Lilly (US, 2006) Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Inc. v. Lexmark International Inc. (US, 2005) Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad ...