Search for: "MATTER OF R L T" Results 3321 - 3340 of 3,899
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Feb 2010, 7:09 am by Adam Thierer
This doesn’t even begin to cover the tens of thousands of pages of legal filings, economic studies, consultant reports and other filings submitted to the FCC and state agencies by groups and individuals looking to have a say in the matter. [read post]
20 Feb 2010, 10:25 pm by Steve Bainbridge
America is a center-right country who majority will not embrace a paleo/Capital L Libertarian like Paul no matter what the CPAC folks might think. [read post]
18 Feb 2010, 9:04 am by velvel
February 18, 2010More On The Bubbe Meisse of SIPC and The Trusteeby Lawrence R. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 12:33 pm by velvel
February 17, 2010Comments On The Hearing Of February 2nd Before Judge Liflandby Lawrence R. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 4:04 am
(Afro-IP)   United Kingdom EWCA (Civ): Carving out an exception to injunctive relief: Virgin Atlantic v Premium Aircraft (t/a Contour (PatLit) EWHC (Ch): No short-cut to passing-off where forgery alleged: Radiocomms Systems Ltd v Radio Communications Systems Ltd & Tomlinson (IPKat) EWHC (Ch): Who pays when a copyright claim is dropped? [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 3:24 am by Bob Kraft
" “This truly innovative program will provide invaluable assistance and support to patients and families coping with severely disabling rare diseases,” said Peter L. [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 2:36 pm by Martin George
An enlarged version of this article is going to be published in the Cahier de l’Arbitrage 2010. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 11:50 am by Chuck Ramsay
  Practically speaking, however, the source code coalition has prepared matters to point where it requires little effort from attorneys to take advantage of this issue. [read post]
8 Feb 2010, 3:00 am by Peter A. Mahler
  Finally, almost 16 years after the cryptically-worded statute became law, the Appellate Division, Second Department, in Matter of 1545 Ocean Avenue, LLC, 2010 NY Slip Op 00688 (2d Dept Jan. 26, 2010), offers a carefully considered explanation of what §702 means -- and what it doesn't mean -- in a decision also notable for a two-judge dissent from the majority's disposition of the case without an evidentiary hearing. [read post]