Search for: "Arnold v. Arnold" Results 221 - 240 of 1,929
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Jan 2019, 5:46 am by Peter Groves
JLR were, in a sense, too late: unless the Hearing Officer had got it very wrong (a gross over-simplification of the principles set out by Arnold J in Apple Inc v Arcadia Trading Limited [2017] EWHC 440 (Ch)) an appeal court cannot interfere, and anyway JLR's assertion that the sign would be recognised as identifying their business was just that, an assertion, unsupported by evidence. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 5:33 am by Daily Record Staff
Criminal procedure — Illegal sentence — Merger of felony murder and predicate felonies After a jury trial in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, Arnold Johnson, Jr. was convicted of first-degree felony murder, attempted robbery with a deadly weapon, first-degree burglary, and use of a firearm in the commission of a crime of violence. ... [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 8:20 am by Daily Record Staff
Criminal procedure — Illegal sentence — Use of handgun In 2008, Sebastian Hernandez, the appellant, fired a handgun at two men – Jose Arnold Palacios and Arnold Ondongo – hitting Palacios, but not Ondongo. [read post]
23 Dec 2018, 7:53 am by Wolfgang Demino
Also see ---> Private student loan collection suit not removable to federal court (addressing state vs. federal jurisdiction issue in context of original collection suit; sanctions imposed for improper removal in Richards v. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 5:50 am
Myles had spoken with Justice Richard Arnold to ensure consistency with the views of the UK judges in his comments. [read post]
2 Dec 2018, 4:28 pm by INFORRM
Last Week in the Courts On 27 and 28 and 30 November 2018 Nicklin J heard the privacy trial in ZXC v Bloomberg. [read post]
29 Nov 2018, 2:03 am
 Arnold J noted that the issue of targeting has been considered in two recent decisions of the Court of Appeal. [read post]
26 Nov 2018, 11:16 pm
Lord Briggs and Lord HodgeLord Briggs and Lord Hodge prefer the view of Arnold J ,  whereby  the test is whether the alleged infringer subjectively intended to target the patent-protected market. [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 3:25 am
In Regeneron v Kymab (IPKat post here), a patent was found enabled and thus sufficiently disclosed despite the example methods provided in the specification being unworkable at the time of the invention. [read post]