Search for: "Does 1-43"
Results 2501 - 2520
of 4,488
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Dec 2014, 5:52 am
” The evidence showed confusion (note that the nominative fair use test does not have actual confusion as an element; New Kidsspecifically declin [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 12:15 pm
In addition to the orders and measures and without prejudice to the discretion of the Court referred to in Articles 63, 64, 67 and 80 of the Agreement the Court may, if requested, order the payment of damages or compensation according to Articles 68 and 32(1)(f) of the Agreement. [read post]
27 Nov 2014, 4:00 am
This does not mean, however, that firms should sit on their hands. [read post]
27 Nov 2014, 12:00 am
[xxiv] Bitcoin does not fit into the community currency category for exemption from the Stamp Payments Act. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 1:50 pm
1. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 6:25 pm
In that setting, service upon the misnamed party after the statute of limitations has run does not bar the lawsuit. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 3:10 pm
At the time of the shutdown on October 1, 2013, there were 280 active protests on GAO’s docket. [read post]
16 Nov 2014, 7:22 pm
Mutual Trust Co., 2002 SCC 43, [2002] 2 S.C.R. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 2:41 pm
[Canadian] Minister of Citizenship & Immigration, FC 420, [2007] 1 F.C.R. 561. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 12:10 pm
Note, for example pages 29-35, 41-43 and 77-82. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 12:58 pm
Risk for developers does not stop there either. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 9:46 am
If the term “official” as used in the consent decree is equivalent to “officer,” then the only real difference is that the consent decree does not allow a “duly authorized representative” to sign the above-required certifications. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 9:46 am
If the term “official” as used in the consent decree is equivalent to “officer,” then the only real difference is that the consent decree does not allow a “duly authorized representative” to sign the above-required certifications. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
We’ve made no secret of our distaste for the so called “heeding presumption” – that juries may presume that any alternative “adequate” warning would have been heeded by the plaintiff (or, in prescription medical product cases, the prescriber). [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 1:47 pm
The policies as proposed are overly vague and ambiguous and should be clarified as follows: 1. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 9:59 am
How often does a trademark plaintiff allege exactly the same cursory statements about bad faith/intent to deceive that trigger 9(b) in the Ninth Circuit when they’re alleged in a §43(a)(1)(B) complaint? [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 6:48 am
The court here addressed the remaining claims.Lanham Act: Defendants allegedly violated §43(a)(1)(A) by “using [Meltech’s] photographs in [its] web site profiles and advertisements,” thus engaging in “reverse passing or palming off” of Meltech’s photographs. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 4:00 am
Flintoff, supra, at para. 43. [read post]
3 Nov 2014, 11:00 am
(The UN Special Rapporteur makes a similar point in his report (para. 43).) 3. [read post]
31 Oct 2014, 11:00 pm
The party seeking to disapply Article 4(1) or 4(2) has to show that the tort is manifestly more closely connected with a country other than that indicated by Article 4(1) or 4(2). 43. [read post]
