Search for: "LAMB v. HOLDER"
Results 21 - 29
of 29
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Nov 2010, 2:36 pm
But while a "diocese" may thus be seen as continuous in the eyes of the Episcopal Church, that entity, as well as the entity that departed the Church, are each still governed by, and subject to, the "First Amendment rights of individuals and corporations (see Citizens United v. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 10:04 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:54 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
14 Jan 2010, 3:31 pm
Braun Inc. v. [read post]
24 Aug 2009, 4:00 am
In JAKKS Pacific, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Aug 2009, 5:00 am
S'holders Litig., 2009 Del. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
12 May 2009, 4:21 pm
San Antonio Fire & Police Pension Fund v. [read post]
16 Mar 2008, 11:10 pm
The Bear Stearns decision is faintly reminiscent of the decision at the heart of Odyssey Partners, L.P. v. [read post]
