Search for: "Harris v. Holland"
Results 41 - 60
of 68
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jun 2011, 7:28 am
See Crislip v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 5:00 am
From a complaint filed last week in San Francisco: Michael M ____ v. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 2:17 am
And, how did Lucent v. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 11:04 pm
Elizabeth Holland, Suffolk University Law School in Boston, for "Holder v. [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 2:41 pm
See Holland, 130 S. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 2:16 am
Kappos (IP Spotlight) (Patent Docs) Sham patent reexamination action not available in State Court says CAFC: Lockwood v. [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 10:22 am
" The AP report is, "Court seems skeptical on $14 million judgment," by Jesse Holland. [read post]
13 Aug 2010, 6:45 am
Anything v. a Fortune 500 company = fair use less likely. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 2:55 pm
Georgia, reaffirming a defendant’s constitutional right to an open trial; and Holland v. [read post]
24 May 2010, 9:10 pm
Graham v. [read post]
24 May 2010, 11:29 am
Syndicate, The (West Springfield, MA) B&V Cab, Inc. [read post]
10 May 2010, 1:16 pm
Holland 1916 Inc., failed to file disclosure reports with federal and state agencies for three years, according to a consent agreement with the Environmental Protectio [read post]
8 May 2010, 8:53 am
In Holland the prosecutor is appealing against an order acquitting the Arab European League (AEL) of hate speech charges stemming from posting an inflammatory cartoon on their website. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 7:48 am
Harris Associates is still in the news as well. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 1:17 am
Groner "Michael B. de Leeuw, a partner with Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, and Samuel P. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 12:05 pm
Harris Associates L.P., No. 08-586. [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 1:47 pm
New Massachusetts companies. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 10:44 am
New Massachusetts companies. [read post]
21 Jun 2009, 10:00 pm
(ITC 337 Law Blog) Academic perspectives on issues raised in Bilski case (IP Osgoode) Star Scientific teaches a valuable lesson to all IP share investors (IAM) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: Appealing BPAI rejections to the Federal Circuit: In re Baggett (nonprecedential) (Patently-O) CAFC: Preliminary injunctions and obviousness in design patent law: Titan Tire Corp v Case New Holland, Inc (Patently-O) District Court N D Illinois: Post-filing assignment cannot create… [read post]
23 Apr 2009, 4:20 am
Securities and Exchange Commission, the principal laws that protect investors and preserve business integrity are (i) the Securities Act of 1933, (ii) the Securities Act of 1934, (iii) the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, (iv) the Investment Company Act of 1940, (v) the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, and (vi) the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. [read post]
