Search for: "People v. Part"
Results 2581 - 2600
of 25,266
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Feb 2018, 8:27 am
It has been almost easy to forget that the PHH v. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 9:01 pm
Washington and Colorado Department of State v. [read post]
25 Dec 2012, 9:01 pm
This is Part One in a two-part series of columns by Professor Dorf. [read post]
4 Dec 2011, 9:36 pm
The second piece of news is that "in an unprecedented move to eliminate linguistic barriers in public access to patent information", the European Patent Office (EPO) and the State Intellectual Property Office of the People's Republic of China (SIPO) have signed an agreement to work together to assure that, by next year, automatic Chinese-English machine translation tools for patents are available to the public, online and free of all charges. [read post]
14 Apr 2011, 2:11 am
Ordinary people – those who aren’t IP professionals – often have a hard time telling patents from trademarks from copyright. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 6:00 am
I suspect that's true for most people who provide commentary in this format. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 7:48 am
I don’t personally understand why people think it’s cool to favorably quote violent or misogynist/hateful rap lyrics, but I’m not part of the relevant community, either. [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 6:29 am
Milward v. [read post]
4 Aug 2012, 11:25 am
(Eugene Volokh) The quote (from a dissent in yesterday’s Dickens v. [read post]
9 May 2023, 10:55 am
Traumatic v. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 7:25 am
Case of Ahmet Atahür Söyler v. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 9:01 pm
R. v. [read post]
9 Dec 2024, 3:44 pm
From Gustilo v. [read post]
20 May 2021, 8:58 am
You can read Part 2 here. [read post]
3 Nov 2007, 5:02 am
United States v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 10:50 pm
See United States v. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 4:00 am
As the Divisional Court recently said in Bishop v. [read post]
7 Jul 2016, 11:12 am
I think most people would say that "the women" (or "these women") had allegedly failed to . . . . [read post]
20 Oct 2021, 5:20 pm
" Maybe it's a little bit confusing because of the whole "unlawful" part of "unlawful detainer," but still, it's a civil case, not a criminal one, so we don't find people "guilty" or not guilty. [read post]
20 May 2009, 1:02 pm
In its opinion, the court noted that under People v. [read post]
