Search for: "Specialized Component Parts Limited Inc" Results 21 - 40 of 354
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Sep 2009, 5:03 pm by Stephanie Ben-Ishai
Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law: Bill C-55, Statute C.47 and Beyond (Toronto: LexisNexis Canada Inc., 2007). [read post]
4 Nov 2022, 7:56 am by OTy9gYz
Freeports would serve as special warehouses that would temporarily store this machine part during its stopovers around the world while awaiting reshipment. [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 9:12 pm
  Procedural HistoryDefendants Shasta Technologies, LLC; Conductive Technologies, Inc.; Instacare Corp.; and Pharmatech Solutions, Inc. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 10:43 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Given that the market was allegedly specialized and limited, this was enough. [read post]
20 Mar 2024, 9:03 am by Maribeth Meluch
Where Home Depot Went Wrong Employers that are considering limiting employees from wearing certain insignia or messaging on their apparel should heed the Board’s definition of “special circumstance” and be ready to provide evidence to justify their decisions. [read post]
15 Jan 2017, 3:21 pm by Larry
HSLWs are designed to: 1) function as a spring to compensate for developed looseness between the component parts of a fastened assembly; 2) distribute the load over a larger area for screw or bolts; and 3) provide a hardened bearing surface. [read post]
5 Jan 2007, 6:28 am
Nike, Inc., 27 Cal.4th 939, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 296, 45 P.3d 243, 248 (Cal.2003); Price v. [read post]
22 Aug 2014, 6:30 am by Michael B. Stack
Stack, CPA, Principal, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. is an expert in employer communication systems and part of the Amaxx team helping companies reduce their workers compensation costs by 20% to 50%. [read post]
11 Oct 2011, 12:36 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Cir. 2008) (although parts of the specification referred to a certain embodiment as the “present invention,” the speci- fication did not uniformly refer to the invention as being so limited, and the prosecution history did not reveal such a limitation); Praxair, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2016, 9:16 am by Gregory Winsky
The question brought by Samsung on appeal was: Where [sic] a design patent is applied only to the component of a product, should an award of infringer’s profits be limited to those profits attributable to the component? [read post]