Search for: "Green v. French"
Results 201 - 220
of 267
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2010, 5:36 pm
The relationship between the French president and the media continues to deteriorate with the daily “Le Monde” announcing that it intends to sue the Office of the President for unlawfully using the intelligence services to identify a source for its reporter Gérard Davet who had been investigating the “Bettencourt” affair. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:33 am
This expansion led to plots being built on land purchased by Travellers themselves, which had the designation as ‘Green Belt’ (though one might note that it was previously used as a scrap metal yard). [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 2:10 am
Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada v Bell Canada, et al (jiplp) Federal Court rules internet providers not broadcasters (Michael Geist) James Moore’s ‘Radical Extremist’ speech: annotated edition (Michael Geist) (Michael Geist) Winnipeg Dance Company loses hundreds of videos on music claim (Michael Geist) Ole calls for ISP monitoring of customer content (Michael Geist) Chile Software piracy indicates unpaid taxes (IP tango) China Google gets… [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 6:30 am
The case is United States of America v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 3:08 am
shape) discussed before French court (Class 46) Germany German Bundestag meets innovation (IP:JUR) Bundesgerichtshof – comparison of (composite) marks: MIXI (Class 46) Hungary Is it worth bothering if all you get is Hungary? [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 2:11 am
Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. [read post]
27 Jun 2010, 6:00 pm
shape) discussed before French court (Class 46) Germany German Bundestag meets innovation (IP:JUR) Bundesgerichtshof – comparison of (composite) marks: MIXI (Class 46) Hungary Is it worth bothering if all you get is Hungary? [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 4:29 pm
” The focus of his speech was United States v. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 8:03 pm
Penguin Group v. [read post]
6 Jun 2010, 7:50 am
In Suarez v Spain (Judgment of 1 June 2010)(available only in French) the court held that the conviction of the author of a newspaper article suggesting that the King of Morocco was involved in drug smuggling was a breach of Article 10. [read post]
8 May 2010, 6:52 am
Firma Deco Line and Mietz v. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 2:56 pm
In R. v. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 6:50 am
” At Newsweek, Krista Gesaman has a preview of Snyder v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 3:44 pm
: Judicial Impartiality and the Supreme Court in Bush v. [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 2:36 pm
Recently, French courts recognised a Belgian award which had been annulled in Brussels because it was not in line with mandatory EU law.19 The French courts had only verified that the award did not violate EU law in a flagrant way and, consequently, had permitted its recognition.20 As a result, diverging judicial decisions on the application of mandatory European law occurred in the Internal Market.21 With regard to judgments, European procedural law clearly precludes such… [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 12:10 pm
Wolf v. [read post]
8 Feb 2010, 4:02 am
(Patently-O) USPTO Director talks up green patent initiatives (Green Patent Blog) Misconceptions of provisional patent applications (OC Patent Lawyer) Commerce Secretary Locke announces new members of Patent Public Advisory Committee (Patent Docs) (Patents4Life) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: Firm disqualified from representing party on appeal where partner served as opponent’s expert at trial: Outside the Box Innovations, LLC v. [read post]
28 Jan 2010, 1:33 am
Clark & Green Inc.U.S. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 3:51 am
(IP tango) ECJ sets aside partial refusal to grant CTM for ‘Vorsprung durch Technik’ (progress through technology): Audi AG v OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) (The IP Factor) ECJ: Davidoff criteria for exhaustion apply also if goods were first marketed within the EEA: Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV and others v Diesel SpA (JIPLP) Time for a general grumble - General Court decisions missing images, no English version: G-Star Raw Denim kft v OHIM, ESGW Holdings Ltd;… [read post]
8 Jan 2010, 4:37 am
(IP Litigation Blog) District Court E D Virginia: Stay pending reexam denied because a stay would result in ‘more significant’ prejudice given the Court’s overall speed in disposing patent cases: Telecommunication Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
