Search for: "Vijay Kumar"
Results 1 - 20
of 35
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jul 2008, 1:13 pm
VIJAY KUMAR: RUNNING FOR CONGRESS on an anti-Sharia platform. [read post]
SO I WAS IN NASHVILLE BRIEFLY TODAY, and I saw signs for Vijay Kumar everywhere. “Fight Universal J…
22 Jul 2010, 6:11 pm
SO I WAS IN NASHVILLE BRIEFLY TODAY, and I saw signs for Vijay Kumar everywhere. [read post]
28 Jul 2022, 2:00 am
Abdalla (Boston University), Vijay Kumar Chattu (University of Toronto), Ngozi A. [read post]
25 Feb 2021, 2:00 am
Vijay Kumar Singh, Shilpika Pandey, COVID-19 – Law and Policy Response in India: A Prologue, 5 UPES L. [read post]
31 May 2017, 5:33 pm
Vijay Kumar Singh (Associate Professor & Head, School of Corporate Law) has posted Criminal Liability of Corporations – An Environmental Perspective (Chapter 3 in: Environmental Crimes: Corporate Liability) on SSRN. [read post]
21 May 2017, 8:19 pm
Appellees Kranthi Tappita, Rakesh Gupt, Rama Krishna Bhupathi, Sita Ram Mahey, Sandeep Chavan, Vijay Kumar ... [read post]
2 May 2010, 6:45 pm
- Vijay Kumar [read post]
28 Nov 2010, 7:39 pm
- Vijay Kumar [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 11:28 am
The case of Vijay Kumar Gupta v. [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 7:44 pm
(The following post has been contributed by Vijay Kumar, a lawyer and a company secretary by qualification, who is practising as an Advocate in the Chennai High Court with the law firm of Iyer and Thomas)Appeal in the Bombay High Court MSM Satellite (Singapore) Ltd (MSM) had filed a suit against World Sport Group (Mauritius) Limited (WSGML) and had moved a notice of motion before the Learned single judge for restraining WSGML from referring the disputes between the parties to this… [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 7:46 pm
(The following is the continuation of this previous post, and has been contributed by Vijay Kumar, a lawyer and a company secretary by qualification, who is practising as an Advocate in the Chennai High Court with the law firm of Iyer and Thomas)Comments a. [read post]
26 May 2011, 5:14 pm
(In the following post, Mr Vijay Kumar, Advocate, Madras High Court and Associate, Iyer & Thomas, discusses the law on implied exclusion)This post analyses few of the significant decisions of the Supreme Court (SC) with reference to the essential difference between the law governing the contract (substantive law) and the law governing the arbitration proceedings between the parties to the dispute (curial law). [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 12:12 pm
By Vijay Kumar The Federal Circuit recently issued its opinion for the Ultramercial v. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 12:12 pm
By Vijay Kumar The Federal Circuit recently issued its opinion for the Ultramercial v. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 12:58 pm
By Vijay Kumar Later this month, the Court will hear oral arguments for the patent licensing case Kimble v. [read post]
11 May 2015, 7:15 am
By Vijay Kumar The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) recently handed down its first decision regarding an appeal from an inter partes review (“IPR”) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). [read post]
7 Apr 2009, 5:13 pm
What I went to, however, was quite good.Here are my notes, raw and uncorrected except for formatting, with occasional comments in brackets.)Open: The New Deal for EducationDr Vijay Kumar, Senior Associate Dean & Director,Office of Educational Innovation and Technology (OEIT), MITGathering storm of open ed movement and it’s potential for transformationMovement characterized by open content, open tech, open knowledgeShout-out to Social Life of Info [my favorite library… [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 9:05 pm
By Vijay Kumar The U.S. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 3:06 pm
By Vijay Kumar Another chapter of the Apple/Samsung cell phone wars was written earlier this month when the Federal Circuit ruled that Apple Inc. should have been granted an injunction against Samsung Electronics Co. devices for certain patent-infringing features. [read post]
20 Jan 2016, 3:36 pm
By Vijay Kumar The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently decided en banc that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which prohibits registration of “disparaging” trademarks, is unconstitutional under the First Amendment. [read post]
