Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Cleveland
6 followers -
Energise Ideas
Energise Ideas

6 followers
About
Posts

Post has attachment
A chartered patent attorney from one of the UK’s leading intellectual property firms has presented at a major international scientific conference in Budapest, Hungary.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Two professionals at a leading firm of intellectual property specialists are celebrating their promotions.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Leading intellectual property firms, Cleveland IP and Scott & York IP Law, are to merge with effect from 1 April 2017. The combined firm will be known as Cleveland Scott York.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

On 6 December 2016, Mr Justice Mann delivered a summary judgment in relation to an action filed at the Chancery Division of the High Court of England and Wales seeking injunctive relief and damages for groundless threats of trade mark infringement proceedings, and a declaration of non-infringement.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Cleveland IP has promoted a Chartered Trade Mark Attorney from Senior Associate to Partner.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
A leading patent attorney is advising a new UK spin-out which has been established to find new ways of combatting antimicrobial resistance.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Attorneys at a prominent firm of intellectual property specialists are celebrating after the firm itself and six of its attorneys were recognised for the quality of their work by a leading specialist publication.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
A leading UK-based Patent Attorney has chaired a webinar on ‘the patentability of diagnostics in the US’.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
In a recent High Court action , the British car manufacturer, Jaguar Land Rover, sued the Canadian car manufacturer, Bombardier, for selling an off-road vehicle in the UK under the name “Defender”.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) recently held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear a UK claimant’s case for trade mark infringement, based on an EU trade mark, even where, on the same facts, it did have jurisdiction to hear the case based on UK trade marks.
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded