Search for: "L. Whyte"
Results 21 - 30
of 30
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Feb 2014, 10:01 am
The Court distinguished its holding from a contrary district court decision, Whyte v. [read post]
1 Apr 2008, 9:58 am
L. [read post]
10 Apr 2016, 5:47 am
On the whole, it has been taken that the terms of the Weaver decision in the Court of Appeal meant that it was probable that they were, given that the judgment in Weaver relied on the following (from our report): There is significant reliance on public funding; L&Q operates in very close harmony with local government, although it does not directly take its place; the provision of subsidised housing, as opposed to the provision of housing itself, is a function which can properly be… [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
Bevel, Dallas Brian L. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
Bevel, Dallas Brian L. [read post]
3 Oct 2012, 7:10 am
Putting the TREC 2009 Study in Perspective – http://bit.ly/QFYUpC (Steve Green, Mark Yacano) Counsel’s Top Predictive Coding Concerns; Part 3 – Fear of Inadvertent Productions – http://bit.ly/PJVBLk (Bill Tolson) Courts Agree: It’s Easy to Waive Your Attorney-Client Privilege – http://bit.ly/PreW3A (Jason Krause) eDiscovery: Corporate Defendants Strike Back – http://bit.ly/Prd6Qo (Joseph Fogel, Todd Ohlms) eDiscovery Origins: Zubulake Interview Series… [read post]
21 May 2011, 10:45 pm
Whyte, missed by a country mile. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 1:03 pm
Nat'l Gypsum Co., 74 F.3d 1209, 1212 (Fed. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 1:59 am
He was persuaded by (amongst other factors) that the MATCH.COM mark had acquired “a very substantial degree of distinctiveness and reputation as a brand” (Match adduced convincing evidence of its investment in its brand – millions spent in advertising and promotion, and hundreds of thousands of UK customers as a result) along with evidence of consumers referring to the claimant’s business simply as “Match”.The judge reviewed the case law on conflicts between marks… [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 7:02 pm
Bernard L. [read post]
