Search for: "Commissioner v. Court Holding Co." Results 641 - 660 of 766
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jan 2010, 11:44 pm
Cir. 2009) (holding that genuine issues of material fact with respect to anticipation, obviousness, and lack of enablement precluded summary judgment); SunTiger, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Dec 2009, 8:58 pm by smtaber
Along the way, he cites Cass Sunstein on the “precautionary principle,” which (per Sunstein) holds that “it is appropriate to respond aggressively to low-probability, high-impact events. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 6:44 am by malik11397
An Order Approving and Confirming Commissioner’s Sale was entered on May 8, 2007. [read post]
4 Nov 2009, 1:17 am
Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. [read post]
29 Oct 2009, 11:11 am
Opinion below (Federal Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner’s reply Docket: 09-223 Title: Levin, Tax Commissioner of Ohio v. [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 1:01 am
See I.T. 2944, XIV-2 C.B. 126 (1935).According to the Tax Court, in Lenz v. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 7:18 am
Wal-Mart Stores Inc, et al (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) District Court N D Illinois: Inventor/plaintiff’s Managing Director not given highly confidential technical information: McDavid Knee Guard Inc v Nike USA Inc (Chicago Intellectual Property Law Blog) District Court E D Pennsylvania: Warsaw Orthpedic awarded $2M in Globus patent dispute (Patent Docs) District Court E D Texas: ‘I have good cause but it’s a secret’… [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 7:00 pm
On July 21, 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court in McNeil v. [read post]
1 Jul 2009, 12:38 am
The National Law Journal The Supreme Court's unusual order Monday delaying a decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 11:22 am by velvel
And even if one assumes that the court will not consider 30 million dollars to be reasonable compensation and will cut it down, the fact that Picard clawed back and distributed another billion dollars will almost surely count for a great deal in a court’s decision on what is a reasonable commission in the circumstances; it will cause a court to pick a number that is higher, probably much higher, than otherwise. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:00 am
(Class 46)   India Chennai IP Appellate Board: Well-known trademarks - consumer recollection is key: Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Jai ram (International Law Office) Bombay High Court rules on the infringement of copyright in drawings: Indiana Gratings Private Limited & Anr v Anand Udyog Fabricators Private Limited & Ors (Spicy IP) Is ‘science’ essential for creating patent lawyers: some ‘general’ thoughts… [read post]