Search for: "Does 1-43"
Results 4021 - 4040
of 4,484
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jun 2009, 3:25 pm
The high Court’s recent trend towards hostility to patents and low regard for patent quality does not bode well for the holders of software patents. [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 5:30 am
At paragraphs 43-44 he said this: 'ATE insurers do not compete for claimants, still less do they compete on premiums charged. [read post]
28 May 2009, 11:17 am
Subdivision 43(a)(1)(b) of the Lanham Act requires that the confusing word or phrase be used “in commercial advertising or promotion. [read post]
27 May 2009, 3:56 pm
Michael Krieger was hooked (para. 43). [read post]
26 May 2009, 1:42 pm
George found no support for the contention that rights identified in Article I, Section 1 of the state constitution as "inalienable" were somehow insulated from the initiative amendment process, pointing out several past occasions on which the court had upheld amendments modifying rights derived from that part of the constitution. [read post]
26 May 2009, 11:02 am
In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757 (2008).Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. [read post]
24 May 2009, 11:37 pm
This court cannot allow Lumileds to escape its agreements due to a merger that does not disturb its contract with Epistar. [read post]
21 May 2009, 7:03 am
It does not constitute legal advice, and is not intented to create an attorney-client relationship. [read post]
20 May 2009, 2:31 pm
He does not yet seem to have sued anybody for that. [read post]
19 May 2009, 8:50 pm
” (FN 43 and 44.) [read post]
19 May 2009, 8:50 pm
” (FN 43 and 44.) [read post]
16 May 2009, 11:38 am
C.43, s. [read post]
12 May 2009, 10:27 am
The European International Company Law is based on the freedom of establishment according to Art. 43, 48 EC. [read post]
4 May 2009, 4:47 am
., at 1-2]. [read post]
3 May 2009, 10:14 pm
James Daniel Good Real Property, 510 U.S. 43, 81-82 & n. 1 (1993) (Thomas, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)). [read post]
3 May 2009, 6:00 am
The lack of statutes existing at the time Congress passed the law does not mean that Congress could not have meant what they wrote (just as the lack of 100% fluorescent skyscrapers at the time Congress makes a tax credit does not mean Congress intended something other than what it wrote). [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 12:01 am
Arrow asserts that it registered its copyright to the movie in March 1979 (although curiously Arrow's complaint does not mention the specific registration number).In order to bolster its otherwise quite simple copyright infringement claim against VCX, Arrow throws in a barrage of trademark infringement claims. [read post]
28 Apr 2009, 7:41 am
What does Aigner know about law? [read post]
23 Apr 2009, 10:00 am
Consequently, the differing wording in Art. 43 Brussels Regulation does not result in a substantive change which leads to the result that the Court’s interpretation of the Convention in this respect - according to which Art. 36 of the Convention excludes procedures whereby interested third parties may challenge an enforcement order under domestic law (see para. 27 and C-148/84 (para. 17)) - can be transferred to the Regulation (paras. 24, 30). [read post]
