Search for: "California v. Texas"
Results 3981 - 4000
of 4,448
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2009, 5:08 am
’s Messenger program infringed asserted claims and infringement was wilful: Creative Internet Advertising v Yahoo! [read post]
20 May 2009, 5:31 pm
- Waco attorney Walter Reaves in his Texas Criminal Law Blog Legislative Update: Conn. [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]
16 May 2009, 4:06 am
John Hospital and Medical Center sued over elimination of program that paid staff for unused sick days when they retired or resignedMO> DECIDED · Plaintiffs lose bid to return suit to state court; fed court will hear age/gender discrim suit by 3 fem senior on-air-personalities vs KMBC-TV> FILED · Ex-65yo Mid-Missouri Bank Exec sues for age/discharge discrim; sez bank has de facto policy of favoring younger employees> NEWS… [read post]
12 May 2009, 1:40 am
Waggoner v. [read post]
8 May 2009, 10:00 am
: Warner Bros v V G Santosh (Spicy IP) Where do we go? [read post]
5 May 2009, 2:05 pm
Texas Lawyer A California woman has drawn a line in the sand, contending that the state should pay her for homes it says she must remove from what is now a public beach. [read post]
4 May 2009, 6:50 am
The case is Fellner v. [read post]
1 May 2009, 11:00 am
: In re Kubin and KSR International Co v Teleflex Inc (Patent Docs) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: USPTO, Tafas & GSK request extension for reconsideration (IP Watchdog) CAFC: Patent on sex aid is obvious: Ritchie v Vast Resources (AKA Topco) (Patently-O) (Hal Wegner) CAFC: Assigning patent rights: Euclid Chemical v Vector Corrosion (Patently-O) (Hal Wegner) District Court E D Michigan: LEDdynamics wins summary judgment in LED tube patent suit… [read post]
1 May 2009, 10:00 am
(Creative Commons) Copyright Office hearing on proposed exemptions to DMCA ban on DRM circumvention (EFF) (Ars Technica) Open educational resources and implementation of the US Recovery Act (Creative Commons) Twitter and the DMCA: A fine mess (The Trademark Blog) US Copyright – Lawsuits and strategic steps Apple – Apple sued by BluWiki operator OdioWorks, seeking declaratory judgment that its postings do not violate DMCA (Ars Technica) (EFF) Google – District… [read post]
27 Apr 2009, 10:07 pm
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decision in Severance v. [read post]
27 Apr 2009, 9:43 am
AFFIRMS LILLY WIN IN TEXAS ZYPREXA SUICIDE LAWSUIT, Ebel v. [read post]
25 Apr 2009, 3:21 am
As a result of the 1975 amendments, all of Texas, Alaska and now Arizona came under the law, as did several counties in California, Colorado, Florida, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota and two townships in Michigan. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 10:00 am
Here is why (IP Asset Maximizer Blog) Innovative methods for corporate legal managers to reduce IP counsel costs (IP Asset Maximizer Blog) The malign and the benign of the transfer of know-how (IP finance) How to avoid potential conflict when inventors want their innovations back (Technology Transfer Tactics) 50% of venture capital investment is lost: How your clients can improve these odds by using the right patent analytics (IP Asset Maximizer Blog) New website, Intellogist, compares patent search… [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 1:00 am
Reliance on the California decision of Contra Costa Water Dist. v. [read post]
23 Apr 2009, 9:00 pm
Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)); and Gregg v. [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 10:25 am
(See Scheiding v Dinwiddie Constr. [read post]
19 Apr 2009, 6:00 am
In Odneal v. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 5:53 am
In an interesting development, the case has been transferred to the Northern District of California. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 4:44 am
So medical monitoring in California doesn't appear to be a completely independent cause of action. [read post]
