Search for: "United States v. Oregon & California R. Co."
Results 61 - 80
of 83
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Oct 2013, 9:01 pm
Capital punishment in the United States is often considered in terms of its constitutional vulnerability. [read post]
22 Dec 2008, 12:07 pm
The Toro Co 6th Cir. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 6:25 am
Medico (Filewrapper) BPAI finds claim indefinite and not directed to patentable subject under Bilski: Ex parte Hemmat (GRAY On Claims) District Court N D Illinois: KSR obviousness does not require prior art from the same field: Se-Kure Controls, Inc v Diam USA, Inc (Chicago Intellectual Property Law Blog) District Court E D Texas finds plaintiff has standing; agreement transfers ownership and simultaneously a conditional purchase by transferor from transferee: Balsam Coffee Solutions Inc… [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
20 May 2021, 9:01 pm
In the famous footnote 4 of United States v. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 12:01 pm
Gelblum, Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp, Los Angeles, California; Carey R. [read post]
16 Jun 2017, 12:50 pm
—Rafael Mafei R. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 6:26 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 4:02 pm
It is very rarely permitted, since the American system of justice is premised upon an open system in which, whenever one side wants to communicate with the Court, it has to give prior notice to the other side, so that they too will have an opportunity to be heard.).The "ex parte" order would give the RIAA permission to take "immediate discovery" -- before the defendants have been served or given notice -- which authorizes the issuance of subpoenas to the ISP's asking for the… [read post]
16 Apr 2023, 12:19 am
Co. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2020, 9:03 pm
In a statement, the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California stated that the curfews violated the U.S. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 10:07 am
Green v. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 10:07 am
Green v. [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 1:20 pm
(United States v. [read post]
31 Oct 2009, 4:06 pm
(R&M) on alleged clean-air violations at the company’s chemical plant at 1019 Haverhill-Ohio Furnace Road, Haverhill, Ohio. [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 7:59 pm
– Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, July 2, 2010 In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby given of a proposed consent decree, to address a lawsuit filed by Comite Civico Del Valle,Inc. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California: Comite Civico Del Valle, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 10:44 am
Click Here American Trucking Association et al. v. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 3:01 pm
The Reporters stated that manufacturing defects should continue to be decided under a strict liability regime, but they proposed a radical new concept for design defect cases based on what they claimed was the majority rule in the United States. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 11:15 am
Grace & Co. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 9:08 am
– Trading Markets.com, July 21, 2010 Consistent with Section 122 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9622(d), and 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby given that on July 16, 2010, the United States lodged a Consent Decree with 163 defendants (each of which is identified in the proposed Decree) in United States of America v. [read post]
