Search for: "State v. Searle"
Results 61 - 80
of 117
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Mar 2009, 3:51 pm
Searle & Co., 358 F.3d 916, 920 (Fed. [read post]
9 May 2017, 4:42 am
Searle LLC (2) Janssen Sciences Ireland UC [2017] EWHC 987 (Pat). [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 4:36 pm
Lilly; URochester v. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 8:42 am
The Jenkins case is Securities and Exchange Commission v. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 6:02 am
We, of course think that's wrong under Erie - where the default should be, if a form of liability hasn't been recognized by a state court, then it should be dismissed by a federal court applying that state's law in a diversity action.ConnecticutIn Gerrity v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 1:15 pm
Phelan, 9 F.3d 882, 887 (10th Cir. 1993) (“[a]s a federal court, we are generally reticent to expand state law without clear guidance from its highest court”); Aclys International v. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 9:41 am
In his reference, the Judge trotted through the English court's and CJEU's case law Article 3(a) - Takeda, Farmitalia, Daiichi, Yeda, Medeva (and its progeny), Actavis v Sanofi, Eli Lilly v HGS, Actavis v Boehringer, - and found that it was clear that something more was required, but what that "something" was was not clear. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 2:41 pm
Searle & Co., 707 F. [read post]
24 May 2007, 10:40 am
Searle & Co., 775 F. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 2:59 am
Searle v. [read post]
30 May 2016, 10:00 am
The Directive is not intended to impede investigative journalism, good faith "whistle-blowing" or free speech, but will create a minimum framework for trade secrets across Member States.* Book Review: The Competence of the European Union in Copyright LawmakingThis book by Ana Ramalho a must for copyright policy makers and researchers, says Nicola Searle.* The Nominative Fair Use "Defense" in Trademark Law: Confusion in the US Circuit Courts of AppealMike… [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 12:48 am
United States, 17 F.3d 890, 901 (6th Cir. 1994); Albrecht v. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:55 am
June. 13, 2013), holding essentially that, since those meanies on the United States Supreme Court aren’t letting plaintiffs sue generic manufacturers, we’ll change Alabama common law and let them sue someone else. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm
At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 3:41 pm
” – IPKat Nicola Searle reviews G.M. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 5:00 am
” State v. [read post]
23 May 2009, 11:28 am
V. [read post]
23 May 2023, 12:58 am
On the same day, there were hearings on applications for injunctions in the cases of Payone v Logo and Searl v Dimova-Handley. [read post]
1 Apr 2007, 9:29 am
United States v. [read post]
