. .

Your search results for Intellectual Property Rights


Filtration options are available for subscribers only.

Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.


#81
________ VERDICT Intellectual Property – Patent Infringement – Two patents declared invalid by Delaware jury – Infringement of four medical patents.
U.S. District Court - District of Delaware (189200)
#82
$________ VERDICT – INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – COMPANY SUES APPLE FOR VPN-RELATED PATENT INFRINGEMENT – INFRINGEMENT OF FOUR PATENTS.
U.S. District Court - Eastern District of Texas (189117)
#83
$________ VERDICT Contract – Breach of implied contract of continued employment – ________ changes terms of the ________ compensation without good cause – Reduction and elimination of profit sharing for ________ sales person – Lost income.
Los Angeles County, CA (188739)
#84
________ VERDICT – INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – ________ ALLEGES THAT ________ PRODUCTS INFRINGED UPON ITS PATENTS INTEGRATING THE USE OF ARTICULATED ARMS WITH LASER SCANNER.
U.S.D.C. - District of Massachusetts (188561)
#85
$________ RECOVERY – PRODUCT LIABILITY – DEFECTIVE DESIGN OF ALUMINUM BASEBALL BAT – 12-YEAR-OLD PITCHER IS STRUCK IN CHEST – CARDIAC ARREST – PROFOUND BRAIN DAMAGE – PORTEE CLAIM FOR FATHER – CO-________ LITTLE LEAGUE ALLEGEDLY IS LIABLE UNDER NJ CONSUMER FRAUD ACT.
Passaic County, NJ (188585)
#86
$________ VERDICT – INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – LANHAM ACT – INTENTIONAL INFRINGEMENT OF ________ TRADE DRESS PRODUCT – SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL LOSS AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.
Cuyahoga County, OH (187619)
#87
$________ CONFIDENTIAL RECOVERY – MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – CARDIOLOGY –FAILURE TO REVIEW PATIENT RECORDS PRIOR TO PROCEDURE – FAILURE TO DIAGNOSE HEART CONDITION – TETRALOGY OF FALLOT – WRONGFUL DEATH OF 40-YEAR-OLD DURING SURGERY FOR PULMONARY VALVE REPLACEMENT.
Withheld County, MA (187648)
#88
$________ RECOVERY Intellectual Property – Patent dispute – Light-based systems developer alleges that ________ aesthetic device company infringed on patents for hair removal systems.
U.S. District Court - District of Massachusetts (187665)
#89
$________ VERDICT – INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – LANHAM ACT – TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT – MANUFACTURER SUES COSTCO FOR SELLING KNOCK-OFFS OF THEIR PRODUCT.
U.S.D.C. - Southern District of Texas (187023)
#90
$________ VERDICT ON FIRST TRIAL AND $________ VERDICT ON RETRIAL – INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – PATENT INFRINGEMENT – UNAUTHORIZED USE OF WIRELESS DEVICE MOVEMENT WITHOUT INTERRUPTION TECHNOLOGY.
U.S.D.C. - Eastern District of Texas (187503)