Search for: "US v. Levelle Grant" Results 3881 - 3900 of 9,105
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jan 2017, 12:26 pm by Steven J. Tinnelly, Esq.
This hypothetical was actually litigated in the recent case of Almanor Lakeside Villas Owners Assn. v. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 3:28 pm by Giles Peaker
Once the licence was granted, a council inspection found breaches of its terms. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 9:08 am by John Jascob
The court reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment and remanded the matter for further proceedings (West Virginia Pipe Trades Health & Welfare Fund v. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 7:00 am by MBettman
The trial court granted summary judgment to the officers on the no-proximate-cause rule formulated in Lewis v. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 3:16 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: At First Mondays (podcast), Ian Samuel and Daniel Epps break down the court’s latest grants, the February argument calendar and the supplemental briefing order in Jennings v. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm by Graham Smith
So, most likely, will the extension of mandatory data retention to include generation and obtaining of so-called internet connection records: site-level web browsing histories. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm by Graham Smith
 Be that as it may, the IP Act grants broad general powe [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 2:58 pm
| BREAKING: Unanimous Supreme Court in Samsung v Apple finds that damages may be based on a component, not whole product | (Belatedly) remembering Raymond Niro, the most influential person in patent litigation whom you may have never heard of | Genuine use of three dimensional EU trade marks - heated arguments over ovens | Wild Boys Sometimes Lose It: Duran Duran fail to reclaim their US copyright |Around the IP Blogs Never Too Late 125 [week ending on Sunday 4 December] |… [read post]
29 Dec 2016, 4:00 am by Paula Bremner
The court in Pollard v BABN recommends opening up the pandora’s box of US file wrapper estoppel contrary to Free World, and seems keen to second guess the Patent Office’s acceptance of an applicant’s representations. [read post]