Search for: "State v. Harmon" Results 361 - 380 of 1,117
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Apr 2010, 9:37 am by Anna Christensen
Below, Stanford Law School’s Jacqueline de Armas recaps Tuesday’s ruling in Graham County Soil & Water Dist. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2020, 5:04 am by Charles Sartain
The question for the Texas Supreme Court in Piranha Partners et al. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 5:08 am
It is relevant to software, business methods and biotech inventions.* When trade mark components have little or no distinctivenessAs Valentina explains in her first post as guest Kat, back in 2011 OHIM and many national patent and trade mark offices agreed to harmonize their practices as regards trade marks and designs' absolute and relative grounds. [read post]
3 Jan 2015, 11:17 am by Jordan Bublick
The United States District Court of the Northern District of Florida made a landmark decision in Brenner, et al. v. [read post]
24 Jan 2018, 1:02 pm by William Ford
United States or permitted by the court’s decision in Munaf v. [read post]
30 Jan 2011, 7:58 pm by cdw
LEXIS 32 (In 1/26/2001) Marlon Dean Harmon v. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 4:30 pm by Anita Krishnakumar
In one of the few decisions it has handed down thus far this term, Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 5:41 am by Florian Mueller
Apple's lawyers submitted a notice of appeal to the EPO on March 19, days after the hearing and prior to receiving the written decision that will state the reasons in detail soon. [read post]
6 Feb 2010, 6:10 am by Lawrence Solum
Part V returns to this question of the value of interpretive consensus. [read post]
27 Jul 2020, 3:05 am by Eleonora Rosati
The fact that a platform has some or a significant degree of sophistication (as it is for instance the case of YouTube) should not mean that the platform is not a mere facility.Watching Grey's Anatomy instead of studying (on a lawful copy of)Gray's AnatomyPrimary v secondary liability Fifthly (also this follows from point 3 above), the AG rejects the idea that secondary liability has now been absorbed within the harmonized primary liability regime. [read post]