Search for: "Does 1-37" Results 3061 - 3080 of 5,286
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 May 2014, 12:00 am
  Claims 28 through 37 were on appeal—claims 1 through 27 were cancelled during prosecution. [read post]
7 May 2014, 2:25 am
On this basis it rejected Pico’s argument that 'the registration of a mark which does not designate any specific colour covers ‘all colour combinations which are enclosed within the graphic representation’'.Here's one colourful cow that often gets litigated:she's registered in colour and in black-and-whiteIf that were the case, Pico could claim protection for any colour combinations, including the yellow and white combination, for vertical stripes just… [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 1:08 pm by Shafik Bhalloo
  Section 113 does not apply in respect of a determination issued under section 119. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 12:00 pm by Moderator
While there is no formal investment screening by the GOP, the government does monitor large foreign investments.Panama's privatization framework law does not distinguish between foreign and domestic investor participation in prospective privatizations. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 5:30 am by admin
Why does it matter? [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 2:42 pm by Devlin Hartline
And obviously it does—that’s the very service Aereo provides. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 12:44 pm by Frances Rogers
 Although this is a trial court decision which does not create precedential law, it signals the direction of courts in a post-PEPRA landscape. [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 8:59 am by Barry Sookman
Canada (Attorney General), [2005] 1 SCR 533 It is well understood that in Canada the grant of a patent is akin to a contract or bargain between the patentee on the one hand and the government of Canada (representing the interests of the general public) on the other. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 8:53 pm by Gilles Cuniberti
Related posts:CJEU Rules on Jurisdiction in Cases of Liability for Defective Products ECJ Rules on Jurisdiction for Copyright Infringement CJEU rules on Art. 15 (1) lit. c) Brussels I-Regulation [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 12:30 pm by Abbott & Kindermann
(D057446; 201 Cal.App.4th 1134; San Diego County Superior Court; GIC855643, GIC855701, 37-200700083692-CU-WM-CTL, 37-2007-00083773-CU-MC-CTL, 37-2007-00083768-CU-TT-CTL.) [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 11:08 am by Abbott & Kindermann
Newhall Ranch Specific Plan (the specific plan) On May 27, 2003, the County of Los Angeles approved the Newhall Ranch “specific plan” that includes a broad range of residential, mixed-use and non-residential land uses within five villages, allowing for up to 21,308 dwelling units (including 423 second units), 629 acres of mixed-use development, 67 acres of commercial uses, 249 acres of business park land uses, 37 acres of visitor-serving uses, 1,014 acres of open space,… [read post]