Search for: "Hill, et al v. USA"
Results 41 - 52
of 52
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jun 2015, 3:34 pm
Burst at *14. failed to conduct an appropriate analysis of the entire dataset, along the lines of Sir Austin Bradford Hill’s nine factors. [read post]
10 Dec 2023, 4:59 am
Carly Forrest et al, Lexology: Vicarious Liability in Scotland – the retreat continues: on the recent Inner House judgment in C & S v Shaw and Live Active Leisure [2023] CSIH 36. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 12:37 pm
America's ethanol industry stands ready to work with the Obama Administration and Congress to transform current biofuel policies to reflect the evolving nature of the industry and the fiscal concerns voiced by many on Capitol Hill. . . [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 9:23 am
[ET AL.] [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 11:49 am
[ET AL.] [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 3:00 am
§ 791a et seq.) preempt application of the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 9:00 am
: (Spicy IP),USD 20 billion going off-patent: (Patent Circle),Canadian Prices Review Board asserts jurisdiction over products sold in US, but imported into Canada under Special Access Program: (Gowlings),Canadian Court of Appeal affirms decision allowing patent-owner to be joined to proceedings: Cobalt v Pfizer and Pharmascience v Pfizer: (Gowlings),PharmaStem appeals stem cell patent: asks for greater deference to patent examiners:… [read post]
8 Feb 2008, 7:00 pm
– Facebook’s contractual rights to users’ photos problematic: (Spicy IP)PharmaEuropean Commission probes pharmaceutical sector: (Philip Brooks),WHO Board sets course on IP, avian flu, tighter publication policy: (Intellectual Property Watch),India: The Competition Act, patents and over hyped drugs: (Part I - Spicy IP), (Part II – Spicy IP), (Part III – Spicy IP),Ignoring not the solution –… [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:54 am
§9601 et seq. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 10:04 am
§9601 et seq. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 6:50 pm
The critics and cheerleaders of Dr. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 10:44 am
Click Here American Trucking Association et al. v. [read post]
