This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Last week, at Design Day 2022, the USPTO announced that it had completed its summary of those comments. In the request for comments, the USPTO floated the idea of issuing designpatents for what they are now calling “designs for projections, holograms, and virtual and augmented reality (PHVAR).” See, e.g., 17 U.S.C. §
Crowded Field of Third-Party Registrations and Uses Leads to TTAB Reversal of "MATCH STUDIO" Over "MATCH" for Clothing Licensee's Prior Common Law Use Established Priority for "SNORE MD" Mark TTABlog Test: Is "BEDLAM VODKA & Design" for Vodka Confusable With "BEDLAM! & Design" for Beer?
The High Court referred to the terms of the assignment deed and ruled that “ what was agreed between the parties is traditional mode of exhibiting the cinema as could be contemplated by both parties by then, but after technical advent of exhibiting film through satellite has become available. In the present case the Assignor (Defendant no.
CCI , the Delhi High Court held that Chapter XVI of the Patents Act is a complete code in itself and overrides the Competition Act, 2002. Controller of Patents & DesignsPatent Office Mumbai. Controller of Patents and Designs and Raytheon Company v. Microsoft Technology Licensing v. In Microsoft v.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content