Search for: "v. Edwards et al" Results 521 - 540 of 598
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jun 2022, 10:15 am by Philip Pillsbury
Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan et al., case number 3:19-cv-05360, in the U.S. [read post]
18 Feb 2022, 2:53 pm by Ajamie LLP
 Apache Corp. et al., case number 4:21-cv-00575, in the U.S. [read post]
28 Jun 2008, 11:06 pm
In an earlier survey of 3,999 persons in California, 3.2% reported drinking raw milk (Headrick et al, 1997). [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]
11 Jul 2008, 4:30 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com]   Highlights this week included: ACTA continues to be discussed and debated: (Michael Geist), (Intellectual Property Watch), (Public Knowledge),  (Techdirt), (Managing Intellectual Property), (Public Knowledge), (Public Knowledge), (Public Knowledge), Apotex challenge to Acular LS patent barred by res judicata: Roche Palo Alto & Allergan v Apotex:… [read post]
19 May 2015, 3:00 am by JB
  I'm reminded of the political scientist Edward S. [read post]
23 Jul 2020, 8:40 am by Eugene Volokh
The proposed federal criminal code drafted in 1828 by Edward Livingston—who had earlier participated in drafting the Louisiana Civil Code, was at the time a Congressman (and soon to be Senator) from Louisiana, and would later become Secretary of State—expressly covered "threats of withdrawing custom or dealing in business or trade … or any other threat of injury" aimed at influencing votes. [read post]
23 Apr 2018, 1:20 am by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Cyan, Inc. v. [read post]