Search for: "PROPERTIES FOUR, INC. v. State" Results 421 - 440 of 1,986
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Sep 2011, 1:46 am by Marie Louise
Here is Think IP Strategy’s weekly selection of top Online intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
27 Jun 2010, 6:50 pm by Anna Christensen
Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Trademark Office Reply Brief for Petitioner Bernard L. [read post]
20 Dec 2008, 3:00 am
gain upper hand in Blu-ray DRM battle (Ars Technica)   Africa South African Times report on state of African music, lack of support and protection (Afro-IP)   Australia Australian Copyright Tribunal: consumer valuation of copyright: Audio-Visual Copyright Society (t/a Screenrights) v Foxtel and Re PPCA (IPKat) (IP finance) Innovation patents in Australia. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 5:45 am by Florian Mueller
Four years ago people advocating the abolition of software patents made a lot of noise, including a movie named Patent Absurdity, about a case pending then before the Supreme Court of the United States: Bilski v. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 9:25 am by Don Cruse
Rehearing granted in the controversial Exxon well-plugging cases Exxon Corp. and Exxon Texas, Inc., No. 05-0729 (more info) Exxon Corp. and Exxon Texas, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Oct 2013, 3:35 pm by Law Lady
Appeals -- Appeal is premature where related indemnity claim is pending in trial courtPROFORMANCE PLASTERING OF PENSACOLA, INC., Appellant, v. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 1:34 pm
Redding had filed her Montana securities lawsuit against her accountant and number of entities, after a failed $4.5M investment in four TICs in commercial property through DBSI Housing Inc., which promised a steady return and that it would manage the properties. [read post]
Of the current Iowa fence statute, Iowa Code ch. 359A, the Iowa Supreme Court has stated, “It is difficult to imagine a more deeply rooted Iowa statutory provision. [read post]
11 Feb 2020, 8:17 pm by Bona Law PC
United, Inc., the Supreme Court has “consistently stated” that “’the immediate buyers from the alleged antitrust violators’ may maintain a suit against the antitrust violators. [read post]