§

BioWorld USA Inc v. Advanced BioTech LLC

91236811 (T.T.A.B. Nov. 2, 2020)
BioWorld USA Inc v. Advanced BioTech LLC

13 Cited authorities

  1. Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co.

    194 Cal.App.4th 939 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 943 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that party challenging good faith had the burden of raising the issue of settlor's financial condition and presenting evidence of such

  2. Belden Inc. v. Berk-Tek LLC

    805 F.3d 1064 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 112 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a declaration appended to a reply brief "fairly respond[ed] only to arguments made in ... [the patent owner]'s response," as required by § 42.23(b), and that the patent owner had "a meaningful opportunity to respond," as required by the APA

  3. National Cable Television v. Am. Cinema

    937 F.2d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 83 times
    Rejecting contention that “American Cinema Editors” did not have trademark rights in the acronym “ACE”

  4. In re Cordua Rests., Inc.

    823 F.3d 594 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 27 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that certain words referring to key aspects of a genus of services were generic for those services

  5. Del Tabaco v. Gen. Cigar Co.

    753 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2014)   Cited 15 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appellant demonstrated entitlement to a "statutory cause of action" under the Lanham Act

  6. Hough v. Hough

    26 Cal.2d 605 (Cal. 1945)   Cited 111 times
    In Hough, the court stated, "'[t]he parties, in making the agreement will be presumed to have entered into the same with the understanding that the trial court possessed the power to change or modify the award or provision made for support....'" (26 Cal.2d at p. 612, some italics deleted.)

  7. King Automotive v. Speedy Muffler King

    667 F.2d 1008 (C.C.P.A. 1981)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Appeal No. 81-566. December 17, 1981. Frank H. Foster, Columbus, Ohio, for appellant. John V. Sobesky and Ernest A. Beutler, Jr., Birmingham, Mich., for appellee. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, MILLER and NIES, Judges. BALDWIN, Judge. This is an appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (board) of a decision granting appellee's motion to dismiss appellant's amended

  8. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 361,853 times   962 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  9. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 51,752 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  10. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,154 times   336 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  11. Section 760 - Defined

    Cal. Fam. Code § 760   Cited 404 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Describing community-property presumption

  12. Section 852 - Writing by express declaration by spouse whose interest adversely affected; recordation of notice of transmutation

    Cal. Fam. Code § 852   Cited 250 times
    Requiring that transmutations of property from community to separate property be accompanied by an express declaration "made, joined in, consented to, or accepted by the spouse whose interest in the property is adversely affected"

  13. Section 1612 - Subjects of agreements

    Cal. Fam. Code § 1612   Cited 45 times
    Continuing Cal. Civ. Code § 5312