Search for: "Party X v. Party Y"
Results 261 - 280
of 463
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Dec 2014, 12:31 am
The reason is that the EPO interprets, for the purposes of assessing novelty, a claim that states "X obtained by process Y" as a claim to X as such, and will consider such a claim as lacking novelty if X as such is not new. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 2:57 pm
Y v Z (Publicity: Sch 1 Proceedings) [2014] EWHC 650 (Fam), [2014] 2 FLR (forthcoming and reported above at p 973) is a judgment on appeal before Bodey J with a rather different factual background, and where the use of material was constrained not by s 98 but by the duty of confidentiality that flows from the duty of full and frank disclosure in financial proceedings. [read post]
23 Nov 2014, 4:03 pm
The imported item is usually X or Y and there is no middle on which to settle. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 1:03 pm
Statutory Rape: On the other hand, in People v. [read post]
2 Nov 2014, 10:15 pm
Edward X. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 8:26 am
The tort of defamation requires the plaintiff to establish the following elements: That X made comments about Y that would tend to lower Y’s reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person; and That the comments were communicated to at least one person (other than Y). [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 2:58 pm
X and Y are flatly inconsistent. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 6:59 am
In the Upper Tribunal the parties agreed that the FTT’s approach had not been acceptable. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 12:42 pm
”Defendant: “Regulation X also allowed us to do B. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:33 am
Take the religious objection to the federal minimum wage at issue in Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 6:36 am
Tx”. :: Y – Yawns. [read post]
15 Jun 2014, 10:02 am
The Comment to this section of the Code further clarifies: If an instrument is payable to X and Y, neither X nor Y acting alone is the person to whom the instrument is payable. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 1:07 pm
Questioning the Merits of the Technology Chief Justice John Roberts questioned both parties on the technological aspects of Aereo’s service, first pointing out to the broadcasting companies that “[y]ou can go to Radio Shack and buy an antenna and a DVR or you can rent those facilities somewhere else from Aereo. [read post]
16 Apr 2014, 1:49 pm
Why does X's lawsuit go forward but Y's lawsuit is dismissed? [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 5:30 am
[x] See Frank Blechschmidt, All Alone in Arbitration: AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
29 Mar 2014, 2:49 am
X amount in the U.S., Y amount in Europe, and Z amount in the rest of the world. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 12:26 pm
X owes Y some money; here, $85,000 on an unpaid promissory note. [read post]
12 Jan 2014, 5:30 am
UPONOR Minn2013http://t.co/T61hjeeHwT -> Joinder in BitTorrent copyright claim ok, TCYK, LLC v. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 5:52 am
Royal Soc’y Med. 295 (1965). [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 4:45 am
It has no power to order X to give money to Y. [read post]
