:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:專利間接侵害之探討--以美國理論與實務為主
作者:曾勝珍
書刊名:智慧財產權法專論:智財法與財經科技的交錯
頁次:117-164
出版日期:2018
出版項:臺北:五南
主題關鍵詞:專利間接侵害美國
學門:法律學
資料類型:專書論文
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:8
期刊論文
1.李森煙(20090200)。BRCA1基因專利 引爆基因檢測市場爭議。生技與醫療器材報導,115,6-8。  延伸查詢new window
2.曾勝珍(20111200)。以美國經驗探討基因專利之法制研究。法令月刊,62(12),168-201。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.McHugh, Ashley(2010)。Invalidating Gene Patents: Association for Molecular Pathology V. U.S. Patent &Trademark Office。Hastings L. J.,62,185-219。  new window
4.Fox, George(2004)。Integra v. Merck: Limiting the Scope of the S 271(e)(1) Exception to Patent Infringement。BERKELEY TECH. L. J.,19,193+214。  new window
5.Smith, Joshua P.(2011)。Fujitsu Ltd, v. Netgear: A New Standard。DePaul J. Art, Tech. & Intell. Prop. L.,21。  new window
6.Jung, Kate Y.(2014)。HATCH-Waxman's Safe-Harbor Provision for Pharmaceutical Development: A Free Ride for Patent Infringers?。The John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law,13,445-462。  new window
7.Oswald, Lynda J.(2014)。Simplifying Multiactor Patent Infringement Cases Through Proper Application Of Common Law Doctrine。Am. Bus. L. J.,51,1-69。  new window
8.Rader, Randall R.(2001)。The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: The Promise and Perils of a Court of Limited Jurisdiction。MARQ. INTELL. PROP. L. REV.,5,1+4。  new window
9.Marty, Scott D.(2014)。The Impact Of Recent Patent Law Cases And Development, 2015 Edition, Leading Lawyers On Analyzing Changing Standards, Reviewing New Case Law, And Updating Client Strategies, The Interplay Of Limelight Networks Inc. V. Akamai Technologies, Inc. Et Al. And Mayo Collaborative Services V. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.。WL,2014,1-2。  new window
其他
1.Court Jurisdiction。United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit,http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/about.html, 2010/04/12。  new window
2.Schwartz, John,Pollack, Andrew(20100329)。Judge Invalidates Human Gene Patent,http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/business/30gene.html?_r=l, 2011/01/15。  new window
3.Hoopes, Benjamin E.(20101011)。Fujitsu v. Netgear: Can Industry Standards be Evidence of Direct Infringement?,http://www.zmjlaw.com/_blog/Patent_Law_BIog/post/Fujitsu_v_Netgear_Can_Industry_Standards_be_Evidence__of_Direct_Infringement/。  new window
4.Dorsey & Whitney LLP。Attorney Articles, Post Limelight v. Akamai, Are Multi -actor Mathod Patent Claims D.O.A.?,http://www.dorsey.com/eu-post-limelight-akamai-multi-actor-patent-claims/。  new window
5.Steven Seidenberg。Court Says Netgear's Products Don't Infringe Wi-Fi Patents,http://www.insidecounsel.com/2010/12/01/court-says-netgears-products-。  new window
6.(2012)。Statistics, Caseload, by Category, Appeals filed,U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT。,http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/the-court/statistics/Caseload_by_Category_Appeals_Filed_2012.pdf。  new window
7.Tom Tuytschaevers。Court Makes it Easier to Prove Patent Infringement By Standards-Compliant Products,http://www.sunsteinlaw.com/publicationsnews/news-letters/2010/11 /Tuytschaevers_201011.html。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top