Remove topics section-145
article thumbnail

The Mandamus Transfer Battle and W.D. Texas: Why is the Federal Circuit, or Anyone, Hearing the Petitions?

Patently-O

I’m speaking at a conference in Palo Alto, and one long topic of conversation was about the disagreement between how Judge Albright views Fifth Circuit precedent on mandamus to review discretionary transfers under Section 1404 and the Federal Circuit views that same precedent. 145, 98 L.Ed. Donohoe, 201 F.2d 106 (1953).

Law 51
article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (December 18- December 24)

SpicyIP

In this month’s edition, he looks into topics including the Plant Variety Registry, different tales of/ takes on personality rights, and multiple leaks of key documents and their contribution in law-making. SpicyIP intern Vedika discusses this development. Broadcom Inc. vs Texasldpc Inc. Scotch Whisky Association vs J.K.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

[GuestPost] Lord Justice Birss deals with the kitchen sink and the Formstein defence in Facebook v Voxer

The IPKat

The present case has been tried under the Shorter Trials Scheme (a topic for another post, says Merpel.). Claim 3 as a whole The Judge considered that the idea of claim 3 is part of the general disclosure of the application as filed ([145]). This will be discussed in more detail in the final section ‘Comments’.

article thumbnail

Section 1052(c) of the Lanham Act: A First Amendment-Free Zone?

Patently-O

Unlike registration denials under Section 1052(a), the PTO denies registration without any inquiry into whether the mark suggests a false connection between the mark and the famous person. 9] Section 1052(c), at least as broadly interpreted by the PTO, fails this test and is, therefore, unconstitutional.