Search for: "FAIR v. THE STATE"
Results 5661 - 5680
of 30,483
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jul 2020, 5:48 pm
Co. v. [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 4:41 pm
This is illustrated by the recent decision of the Supreme Court of British Columbia in Pirani v. [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 4:30 pm
Br. of United States, Polaris v. [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 9:17 am
Kahn v. [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 9:15 am
In December 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in a standard essential patent (SEP) appeal involving Ericsson and TCL Communication Technology—a closely watched case that many thought would shed light on what constitutes a FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) offer of a licensing royalty rate relative to standard essential patents (SEPs). [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 9:15 am
In December 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in a standard essential patent (SEP) appeal involving Ericsson and TCL Communication Technology—a closely watched case that many thought would shed light on what constitutes a FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) offer of a licensing royalty rate relative to standard essential patents (SEPs). [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 8:41 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2020, 4:57 pm
As a result, on May 27, 2020, the Secretary of State announced that the PRC had fundamentally undermined Hong Kong’s autonomy and certified and reported to the Congress, pursuant to sections 205 and 301 of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, as amended, respectively, that Hong Kong no longer warrants treatment under United States law in the same manner as United States laws were applied to Hong Kong before July 1, 1997. [read post]
18 Jul 2020, 2:51 am
Such modes of service where the defendant is likely to be domiciled in another state have been condemned as insufficient by the ECJ in cases such as: Case 166/80 Peter Klomps v Karl Michel [1981] ECR 1593; Case C-300/14 Imtech Marine Belgium NV v Radio Hellenic SA ECLI:EU:C:2015:825; Case C-289/17 Collect Inkasso OU v Aint 2018 EU:C:2018. [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 6:40 pm
In Rafaeli, LLC v. [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 1:01 pm
Dep’t of Labor v. [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 8:31 am
From Edward Snowden to Luxembourg The case, Data Protection Commissioner v. [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 6:30 am
To be fair, a move away from the status quo does dismantle privilege. [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 4:00 am
What then of the trade publications of professional writers that instructors assign as course readings in York v. [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 3:00 am
Modesto Irrigation Dist. v. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 7:28 pm
” That said, pursuant to the CJEU’s decision, organizations can no longer rely on the Privacy Shield framework to cover transfers of EU personal data to the United States. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 6:02 pm
If you want to walk back protections of CDA 230, taking away immunity for content that platforms know was deemed illegal by a court after a fair process is the low-hanging fruit. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 12:58 pm
U.S. asylum officers are in the main dedicated and capable, but judicial review of asylum decisions at the U.S. border is exceedingly limited—limits that the Supreme Court upheld on June 25 in Department of Homeland Security v. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 10:56 am
In Commonwealth v. [read post]
