Search for: "High v State" Results 6821 - 6840 of 35,518
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Aug 2020, 7:02 am by Elizabeth McAuliffe (Bristows)
  The intention of the patented invention is to enable an aeroplane passenger to plug his or her personal electronic device directly into a high voltage AC power supply in his or her seat, whilst maintaining a high level of safety. [read post]
3 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by James Romoser
In another essay for the series, Amelia Burnette explores United States Forest Service v. [read post]
2 Aug 2020, 12:29 pm by CrimProf BlogEditor
Brief on Behalf of Former Federal Prosecutors and High-Ranking Department of Justice Officials in United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2020, 7:28 am by Andrew Delaney
You need this many jurors . . . for nowState v. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 8:03 am by Schachtman
The Biological Action of Talc and Other Silicate Minerals In 1973, Schepers published a written statement of his views on the carcinogenicity of talc, tremolite, chrysotile, and crocidolite.[11] Schepers’ paper, which was published in an Information Circular of the United States government, pronounced that the “[p]roliferation of pleural mesothelium is a classical sequel to crocidolite exposure which leads to neoplasis (mesothelioma) in a high proportion of cases. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 7:20 am by Ronald Collins
“[A] man of high ambitions … must face the loneliness of original work. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 9:05 pm by Joshua Burd
Supreme Court’s Department of Homeland Security v. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 1:32 pm by Nedim Malovic
In the case at hand, Hugo Boss was able to demonstrate – by means of sales figures, marketing expenditure, and independent sources such as various surveys, studies and sponsorships – that its mark enjoys a high degree of recognition amongst the relevant public in Germany and in the EU for certain goods in Class 25. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 11:24 am by Tian Lu
Like all elements from written works, character designs cannot be protected as independent works, because one written work derives only one copyright title [Chao v Qujing Cigarette Factory, case reference: High People’s Court of Yunnan Province (2003) Yunnan High Minsanzhongzi No. 16 (in Chinese). [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 9:17 am by Camilla Hrdy
  In other words, maybe the consumer buys BRAINSTRONG anyway, even if she knows there is a high chance it won't work or even a small chance it might hurt her.My favorite example of the "materiality" limitation on the deceptiveness bar is the GLASS WAX trademark upheld in Gold Seal Co. v. [read post]