Search for: "C. GRANT"
Results 1 - 20
of 26,505
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jun 2024, 8:40 am
It otherwise granted the NLRB’s cross-petition for enforcement. [read post]
4 Jun 2024, 2:30 am
Article III’s standing requirement—which comes from the Constitution’s limitation on the Judiciary to hear only “[c]ases” and “[c]ontroversies”—prevents the legal version of flopping. [read post]
4 Jun 2024, 2:00 am
Glen C. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 9:05 pm
§501(c)(6), non-charitable business leagues are entitled to federal income tax exemption and may engage in political lobbying activities that are off limits to charitable nonprofit organizations exempt under §501(c)(3). [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 8:37 pm
The court granted the case certiorari and added it to its docket for the 2024 to 2025 term. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 5:32 pm
Circuit Judge Kevin C. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 12:08 pm
Fearless makes those grants on the basis of a competitive application process. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 11:37 am
It added to the Housing Act 1988 list of tenancies that could not be an assured tenancy “A fixed term tenancy of a term certain of more than seven years from the date of the grant of the tenancy. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 9:23 am
The applicant relied on the AS v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (case C‑541/18, IPKat here). [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 5:19 am
Eventually, the district court excluded plaintiffs’ survey and scientific experts and granted summary judgment. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 5:00 am
The language of the proposed rule provides: [t]he USPTO proposes to revise the enforcement provisions in 37 CFR 1.321(c) and (d) to require that a terminal disclaimer filed to obviate nonstatutory double patenting include an agreement by the disclaimant that the subject patent or any patent granted on the subject application shall be enforceable only if the patent is not tied and has never been tied directly or indirectly to a patent by one or more terminal disclaimers filed to… [read post]
2 Jun 2024, 10:14 am
If I had to venture into a prediction, then I expect to see Article 2 TEU and/or the related wording of Article 21 of the EU Charter (the latter was specifically referenced in Deckmyn [IPKat here] to suggest that the alleged parody at issue in that copyright case should not be regarded as being lawful by the referring court) referred to also in the upcoming decision in another freedom of expression-related trade mark case: IKEA, C-298/23 [IPKat here and here].While COVIDIOT concerned the… [read post]
31 May 2024, 11:58 am
For starters, it granted review in City and County of San Francisco v. [read post]
31 May 2024, 9:49 am
We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment granting habeas relief as to Black. [read post]
31 May 2024, 5:55 am
The Prosecutor found that water, fuel and medicine, specifically, constitute OIS in the Gaza context, which may be telling of forthcoming factual findings by the Court, some of which could be made available publicly by the Pre-Trial Chamber, which must now determine whether to grant the Prosecutor’s request for arrest warrants. [read post]
31 May 2024, 4:29 am
The two earlier decisions that the GC refers to rather served to explain why the weakness of the earlier marks did not avoid confusion (the CJEU’s decision in case C‑235/05 P on FLEX v. [read post]
30 May 2024, 7:34 pm
Manufacturers have won this most recent battle, but whether they will win the war will depend on the rulings of other appellate courts and whether the Supreme Court will grant certiorari. [read post]
30 May 2024, 4:00 pm
The not-so-glowing findings are here.Our 2023 report found that the contractor, Stanley C. [read post]
30 May 2024, 12:55 pm
However, in 2016, Sonny Bono’s heirs issued a notice of termination under Copyright Act section 304(c) to various music publishers and other companies to whom Sonny had previously assigned rights in his musical compositions. [read post]
30 May 2024, 7:34 am
The Court then examined the indictment at issue in this case, concluding that “[a] plain reading of [G.S.] 15-144.1(c) demonstrates that the indictment here clearly alleged a crime and was not required to allege actual or constructive knowledge of the victim’s physical helplessness. [read post]
