Intellectual Property Claims definition

Intellectual Property Claims has the meaning set forth in Section 3.7(b).

AI-Powered Contracts

Draft, Review & Redline at the Speed of AI

Intellectual Property Claims has the meaning set out in clause 20.2.4.

Intellectual Property Claims means all claims by Purchaser with respect to an inaccuracy or misrepresentation in the representations and warranties of Section 3.14 or a breach of the License Agreement.

Examples of Intellectual Property Claims in a sentence

There is no pending or, to any Obligor’s knowledge, threatened Intellectual Property Claim with respect to any Obligor or any of its Property (including any Intellectual Property, except for Intellectual Property Claims which could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect).
The Buyer Parties agree to cooperate and assist Seller in the defense of any Intellectual Property Claims, at Seller’s cost.
Buyer shall defend and indemnify Seller against those Intellectual Property Claims only to the extent that ▇▇▇▇▇▇’s allegedly infringing or misappropriating conduct is expressly requested in writing by ▇▇▇▇▇.
Owner shall, and shall cause other Owner Indemnitees to, agree to reasonably cooperate and assist Contractor in the defense of any Intellectual Property Claims, at Contractor’s cost.
O&M Contractor understands that Owner makes no representation that O&M Contractor will be safe from any Intellectual Property Claims in operating or maintaining the Project as required under this Agreement.
O&M Contractor agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnitees from and against any and all Intellectual Property Claims, arising out of or relating to any infringement or the improper use of any Intellectual Property Rights which may occur in connection with O&M Contractor’s or any Subcontractor’s or vendor’s performance of the Services pursuant to this Agreement.
Except as disclosed on Schedule 6.11, there are no pending or, to any Loan Party’s knowledge, threatened Intellectual Property Claims with respect to any Loan Party, any Subsidiary or any of their property (including any Intellectual Property) that has resulted or could reasonably be expected to result in liability of a Loan Party with respect to any such Intellectual Property Claim in excess of $3,000,000.
In addition to the exceptions to indemnity in Section 10.1 (Intellectual Property Claims) of the General Terms, Entrust shall have no liability for any IP Claim in respect of any Certificate Services if the IP Claim arises from the technology that issued the certificate signing request (CSR) or any information contained in the CSR, unless the CSR was generated by Entrust.
Both Parties agree to promptly inform the other of any pending or threatened Intellectual Property Claims of third parties that may arise in the performance of this Agreement.
Schedule 5.5 Actions Before Governmental Authorities Schedule 5.8 Tax Matters Schedule 5.9 Intellectual Property Claims Schedule 5.10 Intellectual Property Schedule 5.11 Borrower Products Schedule 5.14 Capitalization Schedule 7.12 Deposit Accounts To: Lender: Date: __________, 2014 S▇▇▇▇▇▇ Capital Holdings, LP 3▇▇▇ ▇.

More Definitions of Intellectual Property Claims

Intellectual Property Claims has the meaning set out in clause 16(2)(e).

Intellectual Property Claims means all right, title, and interest in and to any and all claims for damages by way of past, present and future infringement of any of the items listed in (a) through (d) of the definition of Intellectual Property, with the right, but not the obligation, to ▇▇▇ for and collect such damages for said use or infringement of the Intellectual Property rights identified above and in items (a) through (d) of the definition of Intellectual Property.

Intellectual Property Claims. As set forth on the attached Appendix A. ================================================================================

Intellectual Property Claims means claims by a third party against the Customer arising as a direct causal consequence of the Services as provided by the Company under the Contract infringing the copyright, trade mark, patent or design rights registered by any member country of the European Economic Area or infringing the trade secrets of a third party.

Intellectual Property Claims shall have the meaning set forth in Section 11.3 of this Agreement.

Intellectual Property Claims. BY OR AGAINST GLENAYRE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES October 29, 1997 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CLAIMS COJK File No. Parties Description Current Status ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5-6797 Glenayre Electronics, Inc. ▇▇▇▇▇ Research has notified Glenayre of Mobile Media and Nextel have sent letters and ▇▇▇▇▇ Research infringement of fifteen US patents to Glenayre, requesting indemnification applicable to voice messaging systems, against infringement claims by ▇▇▇▇▇ and has offered to license those Research. Glenayre has responded in patents. writing, indicating the steps that Glenayre is taking and stating that Glenayre will honor all existing indemnity arrangements. COJK is monitoring the progress of the litigation involving Octel, Northern Telecom, and Pacific Telesis. Of the six patents at issue in that litigation, one has been declared invalid. Trial on the remaining patents has been concluded. The jury found Octel's Aspen and Sierra products infringe the claims of the `436, `817 and `647 ▇▇▇▇▇ patents, but found Northern Telecom's systems not infringing. The jury also found the `436, `817 and `647 obvious and anticipated by the prior art, and thus invalid. The court has issued an order in conformance with the jury verdict. Decisions on various post-trial motions upheld the jury verdict, with the exception that the court found Claim 1 of the `647 patent to be valid. ▇▇▇▇▇ has appealed the court's order to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In 1994, COJK provided Glenayre with its in-depth infringement opinion that Glenayre's voice messaging products as then configured did not infringe any of the ▇▇▇▇▇ patents, and recommending that Glenayre continue manufacture, use and sale of its voice messaging products without modification. COJK provided a supplementary opinion that one of the ▇▇▇▇▇ patents of interest to Glenayre is invalid in view of the VMRS device of Commterm and other prior art. On 10/7/96, ▇▇▇▇▇ Research again wrote to Glenayre and repeated its general offer to license the 15 U.S. patents in issue. Settlement discussions conducted in December 1996 were fruitless.