Cases 131 - 140 of 344
Cornell Cornish v. David Kappos, et al
as 10-5236
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Cornell D.M. Judge Cornish
Defendant - Appellee:
David J. Kappos, in his Official Capacity as Under-Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Harry I. Moatz, in his Official Capacity as Director, Office of Enrollment and Discipline , U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and others
KUROS BIOSURGERY AG v. KAPPOS
as 1:2010cv01173
Plaintiff:
KUROS BIOSURGERY AG
Defendant:
DAVID J. KAPPOS
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145
KUROS BIOSURGERY AG v. KAPPOS
as 1:2010cv01178
Plaintiff:
KUROS BIOSURGERY AG
Defendant:
DAVID J. KAPPOS
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145 Patent Infringement
ARGENTUM MEDICAL, LLC v. KAPPOS
as 1:2010cv01177
Plaintiff:
ARGENTUM MEDICAL, LLC
Defendant:
DAVID J. KAPPOS
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145
HEMPHILL v. KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION et al
as 1:2010cv01159
Plaintiff:
ALLEGRA HEMPHILL
Defendant:
KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION and PROCTOR & GAMBLE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
NIPPON SHINYAKU CO., LTD. v. KAPPOS
as 1:2010cv01142
Plaintiff:
NIPPON SHINYAKU CO., LTD.
Defendant:
DAVID KAPPOS
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145 Patent Infringement
NOVARTIS AG et al v. KAPPOS
as 1:2010cv01138
Plaintiff:
NOVARTIS AG and NOVARTIS VACCINES AND DIAGNOSTICS, INC.
Defendant:
DAVID J. KAPPOS
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145
CORDOVEZ v. AETREX WORLDWIDE, INC.
as 1:2010cv01127
Plaintiff:
MANUEL CORDOVEZ
Defendant:
AETREX WORLDWIDE, INC.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
BIT BARBECUE, LLC v. WILLIAMS-SONOMA STORES, INC. et al
as 1:2010cv01117
Plaintiff:
BIT BARBECUE, LLC
Defendant:
WILLIAMS-SONOMA STORES, INC. and WILLIAMS-SONOMA, INC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP. v. KAPPOS
as 1:2010cv01110
Plaintiff:
MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.
Defendant:
DAVID KAPPOS
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
