Search for: "Com. v. Back" Results 721 - 740 of 1,087
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Feb 2016, 2:50 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  Idea was: glut in dot-com space. [read post]
19 May 2011, 12:33 pm by Russ Bensing
Back in 1996 the Supreme Court held in Whren v. [read post]
12 Nov 2019, 3:42 am by Edith Roberts
Patent and Trademark Office v. [read post]
10 Jan 2008, 4:40 pm
  The Court of Appeal rejected this argument on the basis that an insurance company should not suffer a financial loss because an insured settled her claim on a compromised basis.Here is the case citation: Saskatchewan Health-Health Care Assn. v. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 10:25 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Protection v. enforcement: even if protected as a TM, the scope may be limited. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:55 am by Russ Bensing
  There are court decisions, like State v. [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 3:04 pm
 From our much-admired former guest Kat and respected blogger Norman Siebrasse comes news that the IPKat has been judicially cited by Hughes J of the Federal Court of Canada in Pfizer Canada Inc v Pharmascience Inc 2013 FC 120 at paragraph 75, for the Kat's explanation of the "Angora cat" approach to claim construction (the cited url is not exactly right -- it says "com-uk" rather than "co.uk"). [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 6:09 am
In fact, Lifan stopped commercializing the model back in 2014. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 8:31 am by christopher
[This defense of Zygna not impressing me, for it is hard to back the valuation of a company that is"selling" imaginary goods. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 4:49 am
  Back in 2007, in Bell Atlantic v. [read post]