Search for: "Davidoff v. Does 1-10"
Results 1 - 20
of 24
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2009, 7:43 am
[1] Zino Davidoff SA v. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 12:14 pm
Max Sheppard Mullin New York TMax@sheppardmullin.com and Amanda Jaffe [1] Zino Davidoff SA v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
In his judgment in Davidoff v Google LLC ([2023] EWHC 1958 (KB)) Nicklin J has comprehensively restated the principles to be applied on Norwich Pharmacal applications, emphasising the importance of balancing the Convention rights of the applicant and those of the alleged wrongdoer. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 8:26 pm
In discussing how companies are using delaying tactics to stall hostile takeover bids (a subject for another day), Steven Davidoff opines: The trick is for courts to prevent this manipulation from depriving shareholders of the ultimate choice of when to sell the company. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 4:09 pm
By Judy Davidoff and Alex Merritt In the 2011 session, the California Legislature and the Governor passed several bills to amend CEQA. [read post]
24 Oct 2023, 4:36 pm
What does section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 say and how can the test be met? [read post]
20 Nov 2012, 6:57 am
Richard observes that these comments are made all the more relevant by the recent Kat-rant over the pathetically short time available for consultation in Actavis v Sanofi, a reference to the CJEU in which, this Kat believes, a good case could be made out for a more generous time allowance given the political and economic significance of the case's outcome. [read post]
18 Sep 2018, 2:23 am
Never Too Late 197 [Week ending 10 June] The IPKat is turning 15 ... and is inviting you to the birthday party! [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 2:21 am
On 1 December 2023, Mr Justice Jay handed down judgement in favour of the defendant in the case of Dyson v MGN Limited [2023] EWHC 3092 (KB). [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 9:51 am
No. 1:11-1015 (Aug. 30, 2012). [read post]
6 Dec 2007, 3:51 am
The former clearly has no remedy at law while the latter does. [read post]
15 May 2022, 4:48 pm
IPSO – 11214-21 Zaman v The Mail on Sunday, 2 Privacy (2021), No breach – after investigation – 10225-21 A man and a woman v Ardrossan & Saltcoats Herald, 2 Privacy (2019), 4 Intrusion into grief or shock (2019), No breach – after investigation – 11065-21 Keenan v The Times, 1 Accuracy (2021), Breach – sanction: action as offered by… [read post]
17 Mar 2009, 2:58 pm
Feb. 10, 2009). [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 7:37 am
Selectica, Inc. v. [read post]
29 May 2023, 9:03 am
On the same day, an application was heard in the case of Davidoff v Google LLC KB-2023-000977. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 8:48 am
(Excess Copyright) (Michael Geist) Hill Times features op-ed by Michael Geist concerning copyright lobby recycling (Michael Geist) Owner of Glo Salon and Spa sues former employees now working at competitor for $6.4 million in damages over alleged misappropriation of trade secrets in the form of client lists and client colour cards (IP Osgoode) Federal court issues practice direction aimed at streamlining complex litigation (International Law Office) China Get involved in Chinese IP policy… [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 3:38 am
On the same day, Heather Williams J handed down judgment in Davidoff v Hargrave [2023] EWHC 1825 (KB). [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 12:45 am
In its January 10, 2012 opinion in CompuCredit v. [read post]
27 Jun 2007, 9:41 am
Lawrence Rosenthal, Does Due Process Have an Original Meaning? [read post]
5 Jul 2007, 7:12 am
Lawrence Rosenthal, Does Due Process Have an Original Meaning? [read post]
