Search for: "State v. Handy"
Results 361 - 380
of 476
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Nov 2010, 10:54 am
Co. of Pittsburgh v. [read post]
16 Jul 2007, 11:30 pm
And Judge Kaplan concludes with the following passage from Berger v. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 10:01 am
Of course, the skills of a well-trained patent attorney come in very handy in getting this kind of application over the high bar at the EPO.The latter approach is what at least one party took in the recent case of Laboratorios Almirall SA v Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH [2009] EWHC 102 (Pat), the judgment of which was issued last week by His Honour Judge Fysh QC. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 7:57 am
Three new states are now TMView-searchable: Romania, Lithuania and Sweden. [read post]
30 May 2012, 8:45 am
Benjamin Curtis – in his capacity as an attorney in Boston – argued in the 1836 case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
5 Jun 2022, 7:02 pm
” Plaintiffs state that they live near their respective Defendants’ stores and have been customers “on prior occasions. [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 11:35 am
” State v. [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 1:22 pm
Challoner, 423 U.S. 3 (1975), that when a federal court is making a prediction of state law under Erie Railroad Co. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 1:48 pm
[W]e know as recently as 2005, restated in Gonzales v. [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 8:48 pm
Much as with Plessy v. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 10:58 pm
Thus, for example, in Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe SPRL ([2007] 1 AC 359) Baroness Hale argued that the public have a right to know only if there is “a real public interest in communicating and receiving the information. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 9:22 am
I plan to post these case development summaries in the coming weeks and then reprint them here so they're all collected in one handy place. [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 10:11 pm
As best as I can tell, the "truffles" line originated in United States v. [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 7:44 am
In Gill v. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 8:35 am
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 5:45 am
Illinois v. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 8:21 am
According to AG Sharpston, the correct interpretation should be that Article 5(2)(b) allows Member States to choose whether and to what extent fair compensation should be provided for where technological measures are availab [read post]
17 Jun 2023, 6:25 am
Circuit explained in its 1980 FTC v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 5:05 am
An obligation to state the date or the day does not imply, according to the ordinary meaning, that it is necessary to state the hour and, a fortiori, the minute. [read post]
10 Sep 2024, 2:28 am
’ The case U.S. v. [read post]
