Search for: "United States v. Englander"
Results 621 - 640
of 2,061
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Oct 2023, 9:30 pm
From Gladstone to Thatcher: The Shortage of Parliamentary Time in the United Kingdom and the Implications for Tax Legislation – and BeyondJohn H N Pearce (Formerly HMRC; Associate of the Institute of Taxation, UK)5. 'The normal meaning of securities is not open to doubt'; Viscount Cave in Singer v Williams (1920). [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 12:26 am
In the first article in this series I looked at the US approach to the role of the inventor in patent law and practice, and at the recent decision of Judge Leonie M Brinkema in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (‘EDVA’) upholding the USPTO’s decision to refuse two patent applications on the basis that the ‘AI’ machine DABUS is not a human being and therefore cannot be an inventor under US law (Stephen Thaler… [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 12:26 am
On 2 September 2021, Judge Leonie M Brinkema in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (‘EDVA’) rejected Dr Stephen Thaler’s appeal against the USPTO’s decision to refuse two patent applications on the basis that DABUS is not a human being and therefore cannot be an inventor under US law (Stephen Thaler v Andrew Hirshfeld and the US Patent and Trademark Office, Mem. [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 12:26 am
In the first article in this series I looked at the US approach to the role of the inventor in patent law and practice, and at the recent decision of Judge Leonie M Brinkema in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (‘EDVA’) upholding the USPTO’s decision to refuse two patent applications on the basis that the ‘AI’ machine DABUS is not a human being and therefore cannot be an inventor under US law (Stephen Thaler… [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 12:26 am
On 2 September 2021, Judge Leonie M Brinkema in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (‘EDVA’) rejected Dr Stephen Thaler’s appeal against the USPTO’s decision to refuse two patent applications on the basis that DABUS is not a human being and therefore cannot be an inventor under US law (Stephen Thaler v Andrew Hirshfeld and the US Patent and Trademark Office, Mem. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 7:08 am
McIntyre Machinery Ltd. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2016, 2:17 pm
“Hayuk’s work has been featured widely in popular online and print publications, such as The New York Times (United States), Huffington Post (United States), Juxtapoz Art & Culture Magazine (United States), Hypebeast (Hong Kong), Arrestedmotion (United States), Laughing Squid (United States), Web Urbanist (United States), NYLON Magazine (United States),… [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 5:54 am
In Crawford v. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 9:01 pm
The mother is a citizen of the United Kingdom and the father is a citizen of the United States. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 8:19 pm
United States v. [read post]
4 Oct 2020, 4:04 pm
United States The New York Times had a piece “American Could Face Prison in Thailand After Posting Negative Reviews of a Resort”. [read post]
20 Feb 2020, 12:17 pm
In the United States, Section 2 of the Sherman Act makes it illegal for anyone (person or entity) to “monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several states, or with foreign nations. [read post]
13 Mar 2024, 7:30 am
In Bates et al v. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 4:09 pm
The Courts of many jurisdictions have been grappling with the issue of how to regulate illegality on the internet in circumstances where most of the major corporations are based in the United States where they have immunity from liability under under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm
Term Limits, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Nov 2021, 6:30 am
Wilkins and United States v. [read post]
4 Feb 2011, 8:34 am
Now he goes back to England. [read post]
7 May 2012, 3:05 am
Toronto, Ont. : Continuing Professional Development, Law Society of Upper Canada, 2012 1 v. [read post]
16 Apr 2020, 5:42 am
Russia § 97, X v. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 5:55 pm
One of the key issues in this case is likely to be influenced by the England and Wales Court of Appeal’s decision in Google, Inc. v. [read post]
