Search for: "Companies A, B, and C"
Results 4101 - 4120
of 12,892
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jul 2018, 6:12 am
§ 1125(c) as the use of the infringing marks is likely to blur the distinctiveness of the marks and tarnish the good name of Oakley. [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 6:00 am
[More…] Tippees and Tippers: The Impact of Martoma II by John C. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 11:41 pm
The Guidelines notes that adjudicating officers shall look, mainly, to: (a) the role of the specific individual in the alleged violation; (b) the degree of involvement of the individual in the alleged violation; (c) the knowledge of the individual of the illegality of the alleged violation; and (d) the length of the involvement in the alleged violation, thus, placing the emphasis more on the specific role in the alleged violation,than, on a mere title. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 8:27 am
(b) The installation may not cause irreparable damage to the condominium property. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 8:00 am
By Charlie B. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 4:00 am
Periodically on Thursdays, we present a significant excerpt, usually from a recently published book or journal article. [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 12:54 pm
The Doing Business Test – Is the average of the corporation’s (a) property factor, (b) payroll factor and (c) sales factor more than 50% during the corporation’s last full income year? [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 8:29 am
Rarden, 24 Ohio App. 3d 164.The basic elements of fraudulent concealment are:(a) actual concealment; (b) of a material fact; (c) knowledge of the facts concealed; (d) intent to mislead another into relying upon such conduct; (e) actual reliance; and (f) injury resulting to such person because of such reliance. [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 8:29 am
Rarden, 24 Ohio App. 3d 164.The basic elements of fraudulent concealment are:(a) actual concealment; (b) of a material fact; (c) knowledge of the facts concealed; (d) intent to mislead another into relying upon such conduct; (e) actual reliance; and (f) injury resulting to such person because of such reliance. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 10:35 am
The ruling involved a federal civil enforcement action filed by the CFTC in January 2018 against Patrick McDonnell and his company, CabbageTech, Corp. d/b/a Coin Drop Markets (“CDM”), charging the defendants with fraud and misappropriation in connection with purchases and trading of the virtual currencies Bitcoin and Litecoin. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 10:15 am
For example, if a for-profit company owns a non-profit company that acts as its charitable arm, it appears the non-profit company may qualify as an “entity. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 8:53 am
They are selected for a) the firms that litigate (practicing v. non-practicing), b) the patents that are litigated (individual, portfolio, lead), and c) the cases that are litigated to judgment (default, settlement, summary judgment, trial).In the realm of which firms and patents litigate, most of the studies have looked at the litigation level, comparing characteristics of patents and technology with samples of those patents and technologies that were not litigated. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 3:53 am
§ 1125(c). [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 3:25 am
Anyone investing in a new business needs to (a) perform a comprehensive trademark search for other possible users of the business’s proposed name, and (b) secure registration and ownership of the proposed mark in the new company’s name. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 1:00 am
This appeal considered the interpretation of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s 1(2)(b). [read post]
22 Jul 2018, 5:45 pm
In our brief, we clearly demonstrated that our client met the requirements set forth in the INA §203(b)(1)(C). [read post]
22 Jul 2018, 1:39 pm
Or a company may lease data storage that is permanently, or even occasionally, located in South Dakota. [read post]
20 Jul 2018, 4:34 pm
C. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 9:00 pm
Freshley’s – 4 ct./7.2 oz. 072250011907 10/09/18 through 10/19/18 309 8187 A 75 D 309 8187 B 75 D 309 8190 C 75 D 309 8194 B 75 D 309 8194 C 75 D Mrs. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 2:11 pm
Oracle left employers up in the air as to whether California law would apply in other contexts, such as (a) when non-California residents work partial days of work in California, (b) when the employees worked for non-California based employers, or (c) when the wage and hour provisions at issue were something other than the cal-peculiar rules on daily overtime. [read post]
