Search for: "State v. Jardine " Results 221 - 232 of 232
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Feb 2013, 4:24 pm by Ken
From the enactment of the guidelines in the 1980s until United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 11:58 am by WSLL
If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance] Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court Case Name: Elk Ridge Lodge, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
17 Apr 2011, 12:30 pm
The complaint cites Justice Story's dicta in Lowell v Lewis (1817) which stated that inventions that are "injurious to the well being, good policy, or sound morals of society" are unpatentable. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 1:12 pm
Markus Ederer (Secretary of State, German Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs), and Grand Justice Guixiang Liu (Grand Justice of Second Rank and Executive Member of the Adjudication Committee, the Supreme People’s Court) addressed in the topic “The Rule of Law: Local and Global Perspectives”, subsequent to which Giles White (General Counsel, Jardine Matheson Limited), Vincent Connor (Head of Hong Kong Office and Asian Sectors, Pinsent Masons), and Yi Zhang… [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 5:54 am by Rob Robinson
 bit.ly/zwruTK (Ron Friedmann) Cost of Converting (Electronically Stored Information) Jardin v. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 8:52 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Lastowka: Jardine: we turn it into a substitute likely confusion test and put the burden of disproving confusion on defendant. [read post]