We'll help you find the right solution for your needs
Does this sound like your topic?
|LawUpdates.com||Starbucks v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee: “Substantial Similarity” Not Required to Prove Dilution by Blurring||2010|
|LawUpdates.com||Int’l Seaway Trading v. Walgreens: The Ordinary Observer Test Is the Sole Test of Invalidity of a Design Patent||2010|
|LawUpdates.com||SEB v. Montgomery Ward: “Deliberate Indifference” Can Sustain Inducement Claim||2010|
|LawUpdates.com||AP v. All Headline News: Applying the “Hot News” Doctrine to the Internet||2009|
|LawUpdates.com||In re Spirits Int’l: A Mark Is Geographically Deceptively Misdescriptive Only if Materially Deceptive to a Substantial Portion of the Intended Audience||2009|
|LawUpdates.com||Exergen v. Wal-Mart: Raising the Pleading Requirement for Inequitable Conduct||2009|
|Daily Journal||Managing Partner’s Entrepreneurial Enthusiasm Inspires Excitement In Recruits||2009|
|China IP||Registering and Enforcing a Foreign Trademark in the U.S.||2009|
|Los Angeles Lawyer||Everlasting Fame: Recent Legislation Has Clarified the Descendible Right of Publicity for Personalities Who Died Prior to 1985||2009|
|Entrepreneurship 3e||Patent Protection for Processes: How Dippin’ Dots may make it more difficult to secure process patents after prior sales||2009|
|Columbia University School of Law||Law||JD - Juris Doctor||1999|
|Harvard University School of Government||N/A||M.P.P||1999|
|Rutgers University, Camden||Engineering||BS - Bachelor of Science||1994|
Endorsements from fellow lawyers are an important consideration for many when selecting the right attorney. Be the first to endorse your colleague!