Search for: "Battle v. Georgia" Results 321 - 340 of 484
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Dec 2011, 8:09 am by Lyle Denniston
Northwest Environmental Defense Center (11-338) and Georgia-Pacific West v. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 4:36 pm
(IP Osgoode) Federal Court: IP infringement and director liability: Target Event Production Ltd. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 4:36 pm
(IP Osgoode) Federal Court: IP infringement and director liability: Target Event Production Ltd. v. [read post]
24 May 2010, 10:49 pm
(Copyright Litigation Blog)   US Copyright – Lawsuits and strategic steps Henley, Don – Henley, DeVore file reply briefs in ‘parody’ battle (Copyrights & Campaigns)   US Trademarks 50% successful with jus tertii defense: Golden Temple of Oregon, LLC v Wai Lana Productions, LLC and United Food Imports, Inc v Baroody Imports, Inc (Property, intangible) ‘Fraud and the TTAB: What hath Bose wrought? [read post]
24 Jul 2013, 5:23 am by Schachtman
Ruskin acknowledges, the case of Weitz & Luxenberg v. [read post]
12 Sep 2011, 3:35 am by Marie Louise
(IAM)   United Kingdom EWHC (Admin) holds defendant’s acquisition of illegally copied audio files would constitute an offence under s. 329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002: Sitek v Circuit Court of Swidnica (1709 Copyright Blog) IPO – Original Bucks Fizz members lose trade mark battle over name (Out-Law) (IPKat) Should the UK facilitate online filing of registered design applications? [read post]
11 Apr 2010, 8:52 am by Timothy P. Flynn, Esq.
 They worry that the Supreme Court could hand their movement a serious setback by issuing a neutral or worse, an anti-gay, decision along the lines of the 1986 Bowers v Hartwick decision (upholding a Georgia sodomy law on the basis there was no constitutional protection for sexual privacy). [read post]
6 Sep 2019, 10:00 am by Richard A. Epstein
So one looming battle of the current Supreme Court term is whether Title VII covers the sexual-orientation claims raised in Bostock v. [read post]
11 Apr 2010, 9:03 am by Timothy P. Flynn
 They worry that the Supreme Court could hand their movement a serious setback by issuing a neutral or worse, an anti-gay, decision along the lines of the 1986 Bowers v Hartwick decision (upholding a Georgia sodomy law on the basis there was no constitutional protection for sexual privacy). [read post]
13 Oct 2008, 12:12 pm
(IPKat) German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) guidance regarding registrability of 'spa' in relation to beauty care products and spa services (Class 46)   Europe ARMAFOAM: the ECJ rules on linguistic and changes OHIM's rules on conversion: Armacell v OHIM (CATCH US IF YOU CAN !!!) [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 12:51 am
But the impact of past decisions may pale in comparison to the Court's resolution, to be made next year, of Stoneridge Investment Partners v. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 1:21 am
The case before the seven-judge panel asked whether Henry V should be held criminally responsible for the mass execution of French prisoners of war after the Battle of Agincourt in 1415. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 5:47 am by David G. Badertscher
Supreme Court's decision this year limiting the extraterritorial application of U.S. securities laws in Morrison v. [read post]