Search for: "Tomes v. Tomes" Results 281 - 300 of 316
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Apr 2009, 3:49 am
Mar. 26, 2009)Affirming dismissal of fem manager's sex/discharge suitDC CircuitDouglas v. [read post]
30 Dec 2008, 4:05 am
I loved the way JaneAnne Murray covered Judge Weinstein's decision in US v. [read post]
8 Dec 2008, 6:29 am
Background A multi-volume legal tome could be written on the topic, "The Constitution at Roadside. [read post]
28 Nov 2008, 5:14 pm
La utilización de esta vía es completamente desaconsejable. [read post]
20 Nov 2008, 1:23 pm
Making sense of a weeklong series of five proceedings starting today, at all three levels of the federal courts, sounds like a prescription for a dizzying and lengthy tome. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 3:57 am
Let the names begin (Intellectual Property Watch) EPO, JPO, USPTO, SIPO and KIPO agree on work sharing initiative (IAM) (Patent Librarian’s Notebook) (Managing Intellectual Property) (IPR-Helpdesk) Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants future work to include global policy challenges (Intellectual Property Watch) End of life for IP (Securing Innovation) Royalty monetization: high-profile deals generate excitement among TTOs (Technology Transfer Tactics) Indentifying valuable… [read post]
26 Sep 2008, 11:45 pm
(Techdirt)   India Warner loses Hari Puttar case before Delhi High Court for delay in taking action and suppression of material facts (SPICY IP) (IPKat) (Techdirt) (SPICY IP) (Innovationpartners) Delay in evidence suffocates trade mark opposition: Pidilite Industries Limited v Registrar of Trademarks (International Law Office) Delhi High Court rules in Wipro's favour in its trade mark infringement action against local Delhi company (RelatIP) Delhi High Court: Mattel… [read post]
9 Sep 2008, 8:24 am
"The District Court analyses leading case law in the issue of transformative and derivative works (such as Castle Rock Entertainment v. [read post]
21 Mar 2008, 5:01 pm
In the US the notion dates from a judge’s broad statement in Haelen Laboratories v Topps Chewing Gum, 1953 litigation involving baseball cards. [read post]