When.com Web Search

  1. Ads

    related to: south carolina patent lawsuits for sale

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_v._South_Carolina...

    U.S. Const. amends. V, XIV. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (1992), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States established the "total takings" test for evaluating whether a particular regulatory action constitutes a regulatory taking that requires compensation. [1]

  3. List of United States Supreme Court patent case law

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    The Court found contributory infringement for the sale of the defendant's ink with patent owner's machine (inherency doctrine). Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. Co, v. Wagner Elec. & Mfg. Co. 225 U.S. 604: 1912: Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell: 229 U.S. 1: 1913: Patent right does not include right to dictate the price of the product. The Fair v. Kohler Die ...

  4. List of United States patent law cases - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    United States v. Glaxo Group Ltd. - Supreme Court, 1973. Relation between patent law and antitrust law. Dann v. Johnston - Supreme Court, 1976. Patentability of a claim for a business method patent (but the decision turns on obviousness rather than patent-eligibility). Sakraida v. Ag Pro - Supreme Court, 1976.

  5. History of United States patent law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_United_States...

    Near the end of the 18th century, states started to pass general patent laws replacing the case-specific acts. These state-level general acts set up standardized procedures for patent applications, an examination process, and general terms for patent holdings. The first state to pass a general patent law was South Carolina, in 1784. [7]

  6. Bowman v. Monsanto Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowman_v._Monsanto_Co.

    Bowman v. Monsanto Co., 569 U.S. 278 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court patent decision in which the Court unanimously affirmed the decision of the Federal Circuit that the patent exhaustion doctrine does not permit a farmer to plant and grow saved, patented seeds without the patent owner's permission. [1]

  7. Impression Prods., Inc. v. Lexmark Int'l, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impression_Prods.,_Inc._v...

    Ginsburg. Laws applied. 35 U.S.C. § 154 (a) Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., 581 U.S. ___ (2017), is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States on the exhaustion doctrine in patent law in which the Court held that after the sale of a patented item, the patent holder cannot sue for patent infringement relating ...

  8. Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quanta_Computer,_Inc._v...

    Thomas, joined by unanimous. Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc., 553 U.S. 617 (2008), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court reaffirmed the validity of the patent exhaustion doctrine. [1] The decision made uncertain the continuing precedential value of a line of decisions in the Federal Circuit that ...

  9. United States patent law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_patent_law

    United States patent law. The United States is considered to have the most favorable legal regime for inventors and patent owners in the world. [ 1 ] Under United States law, a patent is a right granted to the inventor of a (1) process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, (2) that is new, useful, and non-obvious.