Search for: "United States v. Weller"
Results 41 - 48
of 48
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Nov 2014, 3:05 pm
United States, 121 U.S.App. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 1:36 pm
’ paper by Graeme Clark SC (IP Down Under) Full Federal Court decision concerning brand reputation in context of ‘lookalike’ products and famous brands: Hansen Beverage Company v Bickfords (Australia) Pty Ltd (Mallesons Stephen Jaques) Federal Court holds that grace period applicable to a ‘parent patent’ is different to that of its divisional ‘child’: Mont Adventure Equipment v Phoenix Leisure Group (IP Down… [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 5:01 am
" No, said the California Supreme Court: [W]e are not persuaded that imposing a duty on landlords to withhold rental units from those they believe to be gang members is a fair or workable solution to [the] problem [of gang violence], or one consistent with our state's public policy as a whole. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 9:22 am
The school lost its accreditation in 1946, and closed.16 After receiving this degree, Selikoff continued his efforts to return to Scotland, to complete his “triple qualification” for medical licensure in Scotland, which would allow him to sit for the licensing examination in one of the United States. 1943 – 1944. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 6:50 pm
The school lost its accreditation in 1946, and closed.[19] After receiving this degree, Selikoff continued his efforts to return to Scotland, to complete his “triple qualification” for medical licensure in Scotland, which would allow him to sit for the licensing examination in one of the United States. 1943 – 1944. [read post]
12 May 2009, 10:27 am
Any kind of more or less unreflected import of concepts from the United States should be denied in p [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 10:51 am
The political economy of international standard setting in financial reporting: how the United States led the adoption of IFRS across the world. [read post]
26 Jun 2024, 10:02 pm
The judgment was later confirmed by the Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal’s ruling No. 31/2024 of 29 January 2024 but subsequently overturned by the aforementioned ADSC’s decision reported here.[5] It is worth recalling that, in this particular case, the ADSC clearly stated that the Civil Marriage Law does not apply to foreign Muslims irrespective of their origins. [read post]
