Search for: "The Achievable, Inc."
Results 2721 - 2740
of 6,775
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 May 2016, 4:00 am
When international financial organizations, such as the appellant World Bank Group, share information gathered from informants across the world with the law enforcement agencies of member states, they help achieve what neither could do on their own. [read post]
11 May 2016, 4:00 am
., Inc. [read post]
10 May 2016, 7:56 am
The general sense is that the judges were reluctant to give no effect to the clause, but could find no principled basis upon which any restriction on the manner or form in which an agreement could be varied could be achieved. [read post]
9 May 2016, 5:40 pm
Holt’s Cigar Co.; Huntley & Huntley, Inc. v. [read post]
9 May 2016, 12:27 pm
”Depuy Spine, Inc v. [read post]
6 May 2016, 8:15 am
“I am confident we can achieve a breakthrough in my lifetime. [read post]
3 May 2016, 2:41 pm
Sarah Feingold, Etsy, Inc.: Free speech—we need the internet as it is, doing pretty well. [read post]
3 May 2016, 12:09 am
Botulism is a rare, life-threatening paralytic illness caused by neurotoxins produced by an anaerobic, gram-positive, spore-forming bacterium, Clostridium botulinum. [read post]
2 May 2016, 8:54 pm
Applicable Legal Standards Official description: Actual and “red flag” knowledge requirements; financial benefit/right to control test; willful blindness; repeat infringers; good-faith requirements and Lenz; misrepresentation; fair use; use of representative lists; availability of injunctive relief; use of subpoenas; role of “standard technical measures”; and other pertinent issues. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 11:29 am
Following the important decision by the European Court of Justice in Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González (2014), which found a “right to be forgotten” in the European Data Protection Directive, it is natural to ask if there is an equivalent or similar right to be forgotten in Canada. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 12:12 pm
On March 1, 2016, before it was sued in Pennsylvania, Harbor Freight Tools filed a declaratory judgment action against Carlson Lynch in the Central District of California (Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 8:42 am
“ [1] Brown & Brown Inc. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 8:42 am
“ [1] Brown & Brown Inc. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 3:17 am
Justice Kornreich’s decision also emphasized the difference between non-actionable disagreement over business strategy and the dissolution-triggering inability to achieve the LLC’s intended purpose: Most importantly, there is no basis to believe, even assuming the allegations in the petition to be true, that the stated purpose of the Company cannot be achieved or that the Company cannot feasibly turn a profit. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 3:17 am
Justice Kornreich’s decision also emphasized the difference between non-actionable disagreement over business strategy and the dissolution-triggering inability to achieve the LLC’s intended purpose: Most importantly, there is no basis to believe, even assuming the allegations in the petition to be true, that the stated purpose of the Company cannot be achieved or that the Company cannot feasibly turn a profit. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 3:17 am
Justice Kornreich’s decision also emphasized the difference between non-actionable disagreement over business strategy and the dissolution-triggering inability to achieve the LLC’s intended purpose: Most importantly, there is no basis to believe, even assuming the allegations in the petition to be true, that the stated purpose of the Company cannot be achieved or that the Company cannot feasibly turn a profit. [read post]
24 Apr 2016, 7:00 am
Grp., Inc., 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. [read post]
23 Apr 2016, 7:50 am
. * Farouk Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 3:02 am
Self-serving statements by Presto's Secretary and General Counsel regarding the purported wide association of the design with Presto were not corroborated by any evidence.The Board therefore affirmed the refusal to register under Section 1, 2, and 45 of the Trademark Act on the ground that the applied-for mark is a non-distinctive product design that has not achieved acquired distinctiveness.Read comments and post your comment here.TTABlog comment: During prosecution, the examining… [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 2:55 pm
” The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a decision, Orthofix, Inc. v. [read post]
