Search for: "P. v. Heard" Results 1981 - 2000 of 2,208
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jul 2012, 10:10 am by Howard Knopf
 David Vaver explains this issue very well in his discussion of “Taking a Particle Does Not Infringe” at p. 184-188 of his 2011 book. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 4:43 am by Diane Tweedlie
To the dismay of the board, and as correctly pointed out by the appellant, the decision's reasoning with respect to the non-admittance of this fresh ground (page 6, second paragraph of the decision) is rather short, to say the least.However, as can be seen from the minutes of the oral proceedings before the opposition division, the appellant as well as the respondent were heard concerning this issue (see the minutes of the oral proceedings before the opposition division, item 1.4). [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 10:26 am by Neil H. Buchanan
  During an oral argument at the Supreme Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch initiated this bizarre exchange, as reported in Slate:During oral arguments in 303 Creative v. [read post]
15 Mar 2008, 7:00 am
  Shame about the IP: (Afro-IP),Ethiopia receives US trade mark for Sidamo coffee despite opposition from Starbucks: (The IP Factor), (Afro-IP),CC licensed test for African sleeping sickness: (creativecommons.org),Update on PCT applications filed in Nigeria: (Afro-IP),Parallel imports of DVDs to be tested in South Africa: Universal City Studios v Mr Video: (Afro-IP),The W****D C*P of 2*1*: FIFA’s intellectual property rights in South Africa: (Afro-IP),Namibia to… [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 1:06 am by familoo
Those standard terms provide for the anonymity of ‘P’, the adult lacking capacity whose interests are being considered. [read post]