Search for: "Smith v. SMITH" Results 7061 - 7080 of 16,223
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Mar 2015, 12:23 pm
Never too late 32 [week ending Sunday 8 February] –- Brazilian PTO’s delays | The Research Handbook on International Intellectual Property reviewed | Laura Smith-Hewitt | IP, women and leadership: the poll responses | Decline of West’s trust in innovation | Wikipedia public domain photos |CJEU in Case C-383/12 P Environmental Manufacturing LLP v OHIM | The Nordic IP Forum | The future of EPO’s BoA | Warner-Lambert v Actavis Mark 2 | Dragons'… [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 4:00 am by Eric B. Meyer
In Smith v Hutchinson Plumbing Heating Cooling, the New Jersey Superior Court reaffirmed that a single comment, in this case a religious comment, can create a hostile work environment. [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 6:43 am by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 27719 (MD TN, March 4, 2015), a Tennessee federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing complaints of a Muslim inmate's complaints regarding denial of religious jewelry, denial of access to religious vendors and denial of a religious diet.In Smith v. [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 4:30 am by Barry Sookman
Smith http://t.co/4AZbSD4nil -> Social Media's Power to Manipulate http://t.co/zCKcroz8WH -> Canadian Courts Refuse to Settle for Weak Privacy Rights: “Imperial Oil Limited v Alberta” http://t.co/P35flTH966 -> Who's behind the push for net neutrality? [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 9:50 am by Old Fox
Wilson has a well-cited quote, calling the Python the "Rolls-Royce of Colt revolvers" and the well-known British author and firearms expert Ian V. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 4:16 am by INFORRM
David Erdos, University of Cambridge David Smith, UK Deputy Information Commissioner Hugh Tomlinson QC, Matrix Chambers 16:00 – 16:30: Coffee and Refreshments 16:30 – 17:45: Session 4: Jurisdiction, Applicable Law and Beyond after Google Spain Prof. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 4:50 pm by INFORRM
The long running and high profile “blogger defamation” case of Baglow v Smith has been determined in the defendant’s favour. [read post]