Law suit - File #29200/3/2011 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially October.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Sorin, Constantin & Angela Bazgan vs. Ion I. Basgan Jr.

Advertisements

© Kolisch Hartwell 2013 All Rights Reserved, Page 1 America Invents Act (AIA) Implementation in 2012 Peter D. Sabido Intellectual Property Attorney Kolisch.

European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims

Terminating a Franchise Agreement-

The German Experience: Patent litigation and nullification cases

The Property Management Webinar Series Presents Evictions Made Easy (with) The New Rules Instructed by Judge Al Cercone, Justice of the Peace (JP3-1)

Appeal Practice Before Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

The Federal Court System

The Federal Court System

Presented by Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts Court Overview Charlotte Jensen Judicial Education Services February 21-22, 2007.

3.2 Situations By: Kyon Johnson.

The Basgan / Thibaudet Case The one billion EUR chronicle Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially 2004 – The PETROM SA privatization.

1 Remedies for True Owner of Right to Obtain Patent against Usurped Patent AIPLA MWI IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Sunday, January 22, 2012.

Agustin Del Rio CalNet ID: Date: October 27th, 2008.

North Carolina State Government The Judicial Branch Chapter 13 Section 3.

David E. Silverman Brevard County Judge Pretrial Conferences Small Claims davidsilverman.com.

February 19, Recent Changes and Developments in USPTO Practice Prepared by: Office of Patent Legal Administration (OPLA) Robert J. Spar, DirectorJoni.

Of the United States Government. United States Supreme Court United States Court of Military Appeals Military courts United States Court of Appeals United.

Commercialization of R&D Results: How to Prepare For The Early Stages.

Judicial Process How does a case get to the Supreme Court?

Our Office at Your Fingertips. Criminal Data Search Criminal Background Checks Civil Data Search Docket Search Docket Notification Single Point Of Entry:

Post-Grant Proceedings Under The America Invents Act Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association “Washington in the West” Conference January 29,

History, Structure and Function of the American Legal System 1 Court Systems and Practices.

Intellectual Property. John Ayers February 25, 2005.

2011 Industry Sponsored Research Workshop INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Michael Jaremchuk Associate Director CVIP Phone: FAX:

Patents Physical Property Deed Intellectual Property Deed InventionHouse.

The Judicial Branch Article III

Housing Services Forum1 HMOs Planning Update Legal Changes 6 th April - Introduced Use Class C4 (HMO up to 6 occupants) Tightened the definition of a single.

T HE J UDICIAL B RANCH Chapter 18. P ART 1 What is the US Court System?

2011 Japanese Patent Law Revision AIPLA Annual Meeting October 21, 2011 Yoshi Inaba TMI Associates.

1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association EMERGING TRENDS IN INTER PARTES REVIEW PRACTICE TOM ENGELLENNER Pepper Hamilton, LLP.

Post-Grant & Inter Partes Review Procedures Presented to AIPPI, Italy February 10, 2012 By Joerg-Uwe Szipl Griffin & Szipl, P.C.

Appeals in patent examination and opposition in Germany Karin Friehe Judge, Federal Patent Court, Munich, Germany.

ENFORCEMENT OF PATENT RIGHTS IN EUROPE The Hungarian way Zsolt SZENTPÉTERI S.B.G.&K. Patent and Law Offices, Budapest International Seminar Intellectual.

1 Reformatory Procedure in Administrative Cases - Sweden.

Chapter 2 Objectives Explain the function of the courts.

The Judicial System The Courts and Jurisdiction. Courts Trial Courts: Decides controversies by determining facts and applying appropriate rules Appellate.

2.1 b a c kn e x t h o m e Chapter 2 Objectives  Explain the function of the courts.  Explain the relationships of the various courts in our society.

Types of Federal Courts The Constitution created only the Supreme Court, giving Congress the power to create any lower, or “inferior,” courts as needed.

Chris Fildes FILDES & OUTLAND, P.C. IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting AIPLA Annual Meeting, October 20, 2015 USPTO PILOT PROGRAMS 1 © AIPLA 2015.

 The United States has an adversarial court system. › This means that two opposing sides must argue their cases before a judge in order to find the truth.

North Carolina Judicial Branch Chapter 13 Section 3.

Compensation for Employee Inventions From the Patents Law through the Iscar Case: Past, Present and Future Avi Ordo, Adv. October

Law for Business, 15e by Ashcroft Chapter 2: Courts and Court Procedures Law for Business, 15e, by Ashcroft, © 2005 West Legal Studies in Business,

1 28 June 2006 © ip21 Limited 2006 Intellectual Property Issues for the Consultant Matthew Dixon, Chartered Patent Attorney, ip21 Limited

Patent Cases IM 350 Lamoureux & Baron Sept. 6, 2009.

RO patent 22’789 Ion Basgan Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially Application to the Rumanian Patent Office : 1933 The RO patent issued.

Recent Japanese Cases Regarding Standard Essential Patents and FRAND Licensing Declaration AIPLA-IPHC Meeting April 11, 2013 Shinji ODA Judge, Intellectual.

Contracts Claim against Government Managers for Bid Rigging Dismissed David Anderson Levenjewvongoldsteinberg.

 Article III of the Constitution allows for the Federal Court System  The main job is to interpret the law.  The goal of the court system: Equal.

History, Structure and Function of the American Legal System 1 Court Systems and Practices.

Legal Framework of Intellectual Property Protection during Exhibition The Intellectual Property Center of Shanghai University of Political Science and.

Judicial Review The Supreme Court’s power to overturn any law that it decides is in conflict with the Constitution.

Types of Courts Unit A Objective Dual Court System Federal Court System State Court System.

 Before filing suit, the plaintiff must decide in which of the Texas trial courts the lawsuit should be filed  That decision is made by choosing the.

ENFORCEMENT OF PATENT RIGHTS IN EUROPE The Hungarian way

The Federal Courts.

Eldred v. Ashcroft.

The Judicial System Structure.

How to survive an unemployment BENEFITS APPEAL HEARING

Describe the procedures for a Civil case

The Court System Appeals.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 15 February 2017 CASE C-499/15: W, X and V

The Role of the Judicial Branch (courts)

How does the Supreme Court decide to hear a case?

Wyoming Administrative Procedure Act

James Toupin POST-GRANT REVIEW: A COMPARISON OF USPTO

Presentation transcript:

Law suit - File #29200/3/2011 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially October 28, the five heirs of Jean Philibert Thibaudet, represented by the son Jean Yves Thibaudet, sued in the Court of Bucharest, the Rumanian State represented by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, in order to recover the royalties and other intellectual property rights, rising from the US patent # 2’103’137. It appears that Romania used the above mentioned intellectual property rights, to compensate the payment balance with USA, in the years 60’s. February 21, 2012 – the ex-senator Ion I. Basgan (Jr.), contesting the quality of owner of Thibaudet with respect to the US patent 2’103’137, intervened in the Law suit, pretending he is the owner of this patent, based on the Heir Certificates #1 and #9. Ion I. Basgan (Jr.) denied the Assignment dated 1940, between the inventor Ion Basgan and J.P. Thibaudet. February 26, the Decision of the Court of Bucharest dismissed the claim of JY Thibaudet and didn’t recognised the quality of owner of Thibaudet, concerning the US patent 2’103’137, ignoring the USPTO Certificate dated January 21-22, Judge: Mrs Miruna LUPU; Court clerk: Mrs Cristina BACIU JY Thibaudet decided to appeal to the highest court. Chronology

Law suit - File #29200/3/2011 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially Intervention of Basgan Jr. to reject the owner quality of Thibaudet

Law suit - File #29200/3/2011 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially The Court decision to deny the statute of Thibaudet of owner of the US patent

Law suit - File #26030/299/2009 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially Appeal of JY Thibaudet

Law suit - File #26030/299/2009 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially The USPTO Notice / January 21-22, 2013

Law suit - File #26030/299/2009 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially Court decision /February 4 th, 1961 rejecting the assignment from 1940 Ion I. Basgan (Jr.), produced in the court a document like a part of a Decision of the court of the district TUDOR VLADIMIRESCU / Bucharest, dated February 4, 1961; by this Decision, the Court, based on the hearing from January 21th, 1961, decided that: the Assignment dated 1940, between the inventor Ion Basgan and J.P. Thibaudet was a simulation and is considerate as void. Several technical details should interpellate the judge: This pretended document from 1961 has no file number. A law suit should automatically have a file number. This decision in first instance is not definitive, because JP Thibaudet should have, at least, the alternative of Appeal. How can a Court take a decision against JP Thibaudet, when Thibaudet had no acknowledgement about this law suit, he was not represented in the Court and he had not the possibility to defend him self or by an attorney.

Law suit - File #26030/299/2009 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially The assignment from 1940

Law suit - File #26030/299/2009 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially Court decision /February 4 th, 1961 rejecting the assignment from 1940

Law suit - File #26030/299/2009 Jean Yves Thibaudet vs. Rumanian State & Ion I. Basgan Jr. Fondation Ion Basgan – August 2013 Strictly confidentially -- Thank You