Search for: "In Re: Does v."
Results 6741 - 6760
of 30,224
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Sep 2019, 1:30 am
Seeing a PGI in packaging can guarantee that the goods you're buying are legitimate, whether it is looking for that special something in Bolognian Mortadella or Gruyère cheese, it is key to distinguishing the 'real stuff' from the pretenders. [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 9:05 pm
” It does, until a new statute comes along. [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 11:55 am
See for example Ball v Plumber (1879) 23 SJ 656, CA (so, well established), or Sheffield City Council v Hazel St Clare Oliver LRX/146/2007 (our report). [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 6:05 am
(Press TV; China ‘resolutely opposes’ G7 statement on Hong Kong).The interest and relevance of the document and the response does not lie as much on the effects it can directly produce on the situation Hong Kong, but on what it may tell us abut the way in which China and the G7 are coming to reconceive the institutionalization of Empire along two quite distinct lines. [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 5:52 am
This has been repeatedly confirmed both by local courts and the ECtHR (P v Poland [2012] ECHR 1853). [read post]
30 Aug 2019, 12:30 pm
The saga of Kim Davis continues, with the Sixth Circuit affirming that the former county clerk of Rowan County, Ky. does not enjoy qualified immunity for refusing to issue marriage licenses in the wake of Obergefell v. [read post]
30 Aug 2019, 4:26 am
Not only does this seem relatively benign, but obviously necessary. [read post]
30 Aug 2019, 3:29 am
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (Tee-Tee-Ā-Bee) has scheduled five (V) oral hearings for the month of September 2019. [read post]
29 Aug 2019, 6:53 pm
In Manti Holdings, LLC v. [read post]
29 Aug 2019, 8:48 am
What is mootness and when does it apply? [read post]
29 Aug 2019, 8:29 am
Eva-Maria Herring (who in the Qualcomm v. [read post]
28 Aug 2019, 12:28 pm
See In re NuVasive, Inc., 841 F.3d 966, 971–72(Fed. [read post]
28 Aug 2019, 8:05 am
July 31, 2019) the Eighth Circuit continued the sensible holding that an ADA plaintiff does not have standing to sue concerning ADA violations he never encountered because he cannot have suffered an injury from an unencountered violation. [read post]
28 Aug 2019, 7:20 am
See McPherson v. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 9:01 pm
But you’re a communist. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 11:30 am
Bd. of Trs. v. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 7:17 am
See also Stone v. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 7:17 am
See also Stone v. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 3:01 am
” [same, even assuming that Chaplinsky v. [read post]
