• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Displaying 1629-1643 of 50,000 results

IN THE MATTER OF ONE 50" PANASONIC TV MC12090162

Docket K12M-07-009, Delaware State, Superior Court, Kent County (July 19, 2012)
Andrea M Freud, presiding
Case TypeM1 - APPLICATION FOR FORFEITURE
Item ONE 50" PANASONIC TV MC12090162
...
cite Cite Docket

Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing S...

Docket 337-892, United States International Trade Commission (Aug. 1, 2013)
David P. Shaw, presiding
Case TypeSec 337
Panasonic
...
cite Cite Docket

No. 2 - Appeal Acknowledged; Case Remanded

Document In re Panasonic Corporation, 88976143, No. 2 (T.T.A.B. Mar. 27, 2020)
Julia Anne Matheson HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 555 13th Street NW Washington, DC 20004
Applicant should notify the Board immediately if it has not filed a timely request for reconsideration and does not intend to do so.
In the event the refusal of registration is maintained, and assuming that the request for reconsideration/amendment does not raise a new issue, the application will be returned to the Board, proceedings in the appeal will be resumed, and applicant will be allowed time in which to file an appeal brief.
An Amendment to Allege Use will be treated in the same manner as any amendment; if registrability is found on the basis of the AAU, the appeal will be moot; if the AAU raises a new issue, the examining attorney may not make a refusal final until applicant has been given an opportunity to respond.
The examining attorney should forward the application to the ITU/Divisional Unit of the Office to act on the request to divide.
cite Cite Document

AGEMIAN, ANAHID VS PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH

Docket 12SG1125, California State, Los Angeles County, Superior Court (May 16, 2012)
DivisionAlhambra Courthouse
Case TypeSmall Claims (Limited Jurisdiction)
TagsSmall Claim, Civil, Limited Jurisdiction
Defendant PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA C/O CT CORP. SYSTEM
...
cite Cite Docket

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Document AMADO GONZALES et al v. 3M CO. et al, 190113/2016, 596 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York County Feb. 24, 2020)
NO. 596. jSUPREME COURTOF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
eewe mweeeeeaaeeeeeenenneeww ewwwweee seennnnne eee eneoeeex Upon the annexed Affirmation of Dennis E. Vega, Esq., dated February 11, 2020, and upon all pleadings and prior proceedings in this action, and sufficient cause having been shown,it is: ORDERED,that counsel for Plaintiff, Angela Gonzales, Individually and as Executor of the Yh GO CESKRE ; - 74Fhemas-Street on the Estate.
of Amado Gonzales, show cause at IAS Part 13, Room “day of _MARCH 2020 at 9:30 am or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, why
, ah Order should not be entered pursuantto §520.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals for the Admission of Attorneys and Counselorsat Law,granting admission to the bar of the State of New at York, pro hac vice, for the above-entitled action to Anthony B. Taddeo, on behalf of General Electric Companyor such other and further relief as to this Court seemsjust and proper,anditis further,
ORDERED,that service of a copy of this ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE,together with its supporting papers, shall be made by facsimile or electronic correspondence upon counsel for Plaintiffand by regular and/or electronic mail upon all other counsel of record on or before the HsFebAlthor, Dated: New York, New York Feb Lo ,Zo2d Enter: Hon.
cite Cite Document

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - CONFORMED COPY

Document AMADO GONZALES et al v. 3M CO. et al, 190113/2016, 597 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York County Feb. 24, 2020)
Gonzales, 13, Room day of _ _, 2020 at 9:30 am or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, why an Order should not be entered pursuant to §520.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals for the Admission of Attorneys and Counselors at Law, granting admission to the bar of the State of New York, pro hac vice, for the above-entitled action to Anthony B. Taddeo, on behalf of General Electric Company or such other and further relief as to this Court seems just and proper, and it is further, 1 of
I am a partner at the law firm of Tanenbaum Keale LLP, counsel of record for Defendant General Electric Company (“Defendant”), in the above-referenced matter.
I am a practicing attorney and a member of Taddeo Law PLLC, offices at 10307 West Broad Street, Suite 103 Glen Allen, Virginia 23060.
Page Amado Gonzales Index No.: 190113/2016 Dated: Glen Allen, February Virginia 10, 2020 Respectfully Submitted, Anthony BRaffdeo, Esq. Courtof SIppeals of Rarylanb Ennapolfs,
Mu Gent(ntony set my hand Wijerest, I have hereunto as Clerk, and affixed the Seal of first the Court of Appeals of Maryland, this day of November, 2019.
cite Cite Document

BEADEYE

Docket 90098100, Trademark (Aug. 6, 2020)
Case TypeTrademark Service mark
ClassElectric welding machines; Electric arc welding machines; Laser welding machines; Gas welding machines; 013; 019; 021; 023; 031; 034; 035; 021; 023; 026; 036; 038; 100; 101
MarksBEADEYE
Original Registrant Panasonic Corporation
Subsequent Owner After Registration PANASONIC HOLDINGS CORPORATION
cite Cite Docket

Barbat v. LG Chem, LTD. et al

Docket 3:12-cv-02793, California Southern District Court (Nov. 19, 2012)
Judge Anthony J. Battaglia, presiding, Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford
Anti-Trust
DivisionSan Diego
DemandPlaintiff
Cause15:0001 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Case Type410 Anti-Trust
Tags410 Anti-Trust, 410 Anti-Trust
Defendant Panasonic Corporation
Defendant Panasonic Corporation of North America
...
cite Cite Docket

IN THE MATTER OF ONE 50" PANASONIC TV AND STAND L

Docket N12M-09-032, Delaware State, Superior Court, New Castle County (Sept. 12, 2012)
MARK S VAVALA, presiding.

cite Cite Docket

Voxpath RS, LLC v. Denon Electronics (USA), LLC et al

Docket 2:13-cv-01189, New Jersey District Court ()
Judge Dennis M. Cavanaugh, presiding, Magistrate Judge James B. Clark
Patent

cite Cite Docket

64 Order Other: Order ORDER Conduct of Proceedings 37 CFR § 425a

Document IPR2019-00131, No. 64 Order Other - Order ORDER Conduct of Proceedings 37 CFR § 425a (P.T.A.B. Oct. 15, 2021)

cite Cite Document

06-19-20-Conference_Case_Management - Order_and_Notice_of_Reassignment...

Document SD-3C LLC v. Barun Electronics Co., Ltd., 19CV342278, No. 06-19-20-Conference_Case_Management (California State, Santa Clara County, Superior Court Jun. 19, 2020)

cite Cite Document

594

Document AMADO GONZALES et al v. 3M CO. et al, 190113/2016, 594 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York County Feb. 11, 2020)

cite Cite Document

590

Document AMADO GONZALES et al v. 3M CO. et al, 190113/2016, 590 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York County Feb. 11, 2020)

cite Cite Document

INTELLI-BALANCE

Docket 90547758, Trademark (Feb. 25, 2021)

cite Cite Docket
<< 1 2 3 4 5 ... 109 110 111 112 113 ... >>