发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
SYSTEM PRODUCTS UK LTD v TRUSCOTT TERRACE HOLDINGS LLC SYSTEM PRODUCTS UK LTD诉TRUSCOTT TERRACE HOLDINGS LLC
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-06-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz039
Appointed Person
{"title":"SYSTEM PRODUCTS UK LTD v TRUSCOTT TERRACE HOLDINGS LLC","authors":"Appointed Person","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz039","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 H1 Registered designs – Validity – Bottle shapes – Novelty – Res judicata – Issue estoppel – Clarity of pleading – Whether ground now relied upon could and should have been raised in earlier proceedings – Whether sister companies were “privies” – Use of “Wayback Machine” evidence – Litigants without professional representation – Appeal to Appointed Person","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124200353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
PFIZER LTD v F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE AG 辉瑞公司诉罗氏公司案
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-06-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz038
Patents Court
{"title":"PFIZER LTD v F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE AG","authors":"Patents Court","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz038","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 H1 Patents – European Patents – Arrow declarations – Jurisdiction – De-designation of the UK – Shielding – The “useful purpose” test – Wording of declarations sought – Discretion – Commercial certainty – “Spin off” value in other jurisdictions – Forum shopping","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"59 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126009881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
J. SAINSBURY PLC v FROMAGERIES BEL SA J. SAINSBURY PLC诉FROMAGERIES BEL SA
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-05-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz029
Chancery Division
{"title":"J. SAINSBURY PLC v FROMAGERIES BEL SA","authors":"Chancery Division","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz029","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 H1 Trade marks – Invalidation proceedings – Shape mark with dimension and colour limitations – Assessment of essential characteristics - Colours – Graphical representation - Requirement of clarity and precision - Whether limitation to “the colour red” sufficient – Whether graphical representation and written description inconsistent - Appeal to High Court – Admission of additional evidence on appeal – Relevance of other registrations with similar limitations","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127918580","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
GAP (ITM) INC v GAP 360 LTD GAP (ITM)有限公司诉GAP 360有限公司
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-05-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz037
Chancery Division
{"title":"GAP (ITM) INC v GAP 360 LTD","authors":"Chancery Division","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz037","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Trade Marks – Opposition - GAP 360 – Travel related services - Likelihood of confusion – Descriptiveness - Scope of specification of services – Amendment - “all related to gap travel” - Requirement of clarity and precision – Whether a characteristic of the services in issue – Appeal to High Court","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134397598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Actavis Group PTC EHF v ICOS Corporation Actavis Group PTC EHF v ICOS Corporation
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-04-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz015
{"title":"Actavis Group PTC EHF v ICOS Corporation","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 H1 Patents – European Patents – Pharmaceuticals – Tadalafil – Dosing regimens – Revocation – Obviousness – Obvious to try – Fair expectation of success – Relevant factors – Dose ranging studies – Routine tests – Whether permissible to take into account information not available at priority date – The “patent bargain” – The “problem-and-solution” approach – Role of the appellate court – Appeal to Supreme Court","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129319318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
PARAINEN PEARL SHIPPING LTD v KRISTIAN GERHARD JEBSEN SKIPSREDERI AS
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-03-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz014
Patents Court
{"title":"PARAINEN PEARL SHIPPING LTD v KRISTIAN GERHARD JEBSEN SKIPSREDERI AS","authors":"Patents Court","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz014","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 H1 Patents – European patents – Declaration of non-infringement – Ships – System “for” unloading powdery cargo – Cement handling – Patentee’s ship equipped with patented system declared total loss – Ship re-floated – Title to ship passing to third party – Patented system not operational – Restrictions as to future use – Ship re-sold – Patentee not exercising option to purchase – Later purchasers putting system back into operation – Whether work done amounting to making repair or replacement – Exhaustion of rights – Implied licence – Estoppel","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130157099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
REGEN LAB SA v ESTAR MEDICAL LTD 瑞光实验室诉星达医疗有限公司
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-03-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz013
Patents Court
{"title":"REGEN LAB SA v ESTAR MEDICAL LTD","authors":"Patents Court","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 H1 Patents – European Patents – Validity – Infringement – Numerical values – Identification of the skilled team – Common general knowledge – Novelty – Prior user – Inventive step – Mosaic of documents on website – Insufficiency – Scope of claim – Normal construction – Equivalents – Single or multiple variants – Barrell jurisdiction.","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128894233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
DANSAC A/S v SALTS HEALTHCARE LTD DANSAC A/S v盐类保健有限公司
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-02-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz011
Chancery Division
{"title":"DANSAC A/S v SALTS HEALTHCARE LTD","authors":"Chancery Division","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 H1 Trade marks – Infringement – Parallel imports – Medical devices – Ostomy bags – Strike out application – Sale in original unopened boxes – Some boxes re-labelled – Whether the BMS conditions applied – Whether any risk to guarantee of origin – “Legitimate reasons” for opposing further dealings – Whether breach of Medical Devices Regulations of itself sufficient – Whether likelihood of damage or serious damage necessary","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"622 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116179835","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Teva UK Ltd v Gilead Sciences Inc 梯瓦英国有限公司诉吉利德科学公司
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz009
{"title":"Teva UK Ltd v Gilead Sciences Inc","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Supplementary protection certificates – Anti-retroviral medication – Validity – Combination of active ingredients – Construction of art.3(a) of the SPC Regulation – Whether product “protected by the basic patent in force” – Whether extent of protection the relevant test – Issue referred to Court of Justice – Interpretation and application of judgment of Court of Justice","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115491828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Glaxo Group Ltd v Vectura Ltd 葛兰素集团有限公司诉Vectura有限公司
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI: 10.1093/rpc/rcz007
{"title":"Glaxo Group Ltd v Vectura Ltd","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Patents – European patents – Arrow declarations – Gillette defences – Strike out application – Justiciability – Threshold requirements – Discretion – Practice – Requirement for clarity – Case management – Appeal to Court of Appeal","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124784676","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
首页 上一页 下一页 尾页
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整，为了账户安全，请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们：info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务，方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号：481959085
Book学术官方微信