Search for: "Harmon v. Harmon"
Results 601 - 620
of 1,482
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Mar 2024, 4:34 pm
For the most part, the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States has an internal logic and consistent format that eases navigation. [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 12:02 pm
R. 193, citing the Architectural Works Protection Copyright Act. [4] Id. [5] Id. [6] See generally Brandir International, Inc. v. [read post]
26 May 2016, 7:23 pm
You can read all about that here, in the Brooklyn Journal of International Law.Along comes Chemtall, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2021, 1:47 pm
There’s a caricature of US v. [read post]
3 Jun 2019, 4:00 am
As a general rule, a party does not have a right to appeal a court's interlocutory order or an interlocutory decision. *** See Matter of Carver v State of New York, 26 NY3d 272The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2019/2019_03870.htm [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 9:23 am
The applicant relied on the AS v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (case C‑541/18, IPKat here). [read post]
3 Jun 2019, 4:00 am
As a general rule, a party does not have a right to appeal a court's interlocutory order or an interlocutory decision. *** See Matter of Carver v State of New York, 26 NY3d 272The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2019/2019_03870.htm [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 12:13 pm
., Inc. v. [read post]
20 Sep 2015, 11:28 pm
In this way, the court made clear that the reliance criterion is not a requirement which is relevant under harmonized trade mark law. [read post]
20 Aug 2023, 5:20 am
It is worth recalling that this is not a court on the merits: its task is to ensure the correct interpretation and application of legislative provisions by lower courts.Of all the grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court, the most intriguing one is that concerning the application of relevant provisions in the Italian Copyright Act concerning moral rights.Moral rights under Italian law and the issue before the Supreme CourtMoral rights are not harmonized at the EU level. [read post]
14 Oct 2024, 1:38 am
PatentsGif by Riana HarveyKatfriend Federico Caruso (SIB LEX) discussed a recent ruling by the Munich Local Division of the Unified Patent Court in Syngenta v Sumi Agro. [read post]
17 Jul 2019, 4:00 am
The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's ruling, noting that "[i]t is fundamental that a court, in interpreting a statute, should attempt to effectuate the intent of the Legislature," citing Patrolmen's Benevolent Assn. of City of N.Y. v City of New York, 41 NY2d 205.The Appellate Division opined that the plain language of the amendment and its legislative history establish that the amendment was intended, as relevant to Plaintiff, to permit certain… [read post]
25 May 2021, 3:32 pm
General Note 3 to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule does not often come up. [read post]
22 May 2018, 6:18 am
" This is how the majority harmonizes both statutes. [read post]
10 Jan 2020, 7:51 am
Rule 8-131(c)) and case law (Friendly Finance v. [read post]
13 Sep 2021, 12:48 pm
Saint Consulting Group, Inc., 772 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2014); Anani v. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 5:33 am
Harmon Stores, Inc. [read post]
9 Mar 2018, 3:04 am
The latter approach has its origin in a 1971 decision from the UK courts which referred to former English law (Amp Incorporated v. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 4:30 pm
In one of the few decisions it has handed down thus far this term, Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. [read post]
24 Aug 2012, 9:39 am
United States v. [read post]
