Search for: "State v. Simmons" Results 681 - 700 of 797
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Sep 2011, 2:24 pm
 In case you were wondering, they were Margot Fröhlinger, Director, DG Internal Market and Services, European Commission, Brussels Dr Klaus Grabinski, Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) Karlsruhe Professor Sir Robin Jacob, University College London  Marcin Korolec, Undersecretary of State, Ministry of Economy, Warsaw Eurico Marques dos Reis, Judge of the Court of Appeal, Lisbon Kevin Mooney, Partner and Head of Intellectual Property, Simmons &… [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 8:38 am by Russell Knight
Queen (1974), 56 Ill.2d 560, 564, 310 N.E.2d 166 “[W]hen an objection is made, specific grounds must be stated and other grounds not stated are waived on review” Jones v. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 2:15 pm
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT'---~F;:U'l";;ED;::---U.S. [read post]
30 Oct 2009, 7:14 am
Florida (08-7412) and Sullivan v. [read post]
2 Jul 2017, 2:23 am
The Court stated that the operators of said platform, playing an essential role in making the works available, are to be considered liable of copyright infringement. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 6:51 am by Florian Mueller
" (emphasis added) The Federal Circuit said so in its mid-2013 Fresenius decision and based this holding on "[t]he Supreme Court's decision in Simmons Co. v. [read post]
1 Jul 2017, 12:00 am
The Court stated that the operators of said platform, playing an essential role in making the works available, are to be considered liable of copyright infringement. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 7:07 am by Eleonora Rosati
Standard International Management v EUIPO Case T-768/20 EU General Court (July 2022)Can a hotel in the United States use an EU trade mark? [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 7:34 am by Stephen Wermiel
On Wednesday, June 26, he shared his strong disagreement with the majority’s ruling striking down a portion of the Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. [read post]
16 Feb 2017, 12:10 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Indeed, this amendment conforms to the California Supreme Court’s decision in Duran v. [read post]