Search for: "Low v. Low"
Results 8141 - 8160
of 15,558
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jun 2022, 9:01 pm
In the 2014 case of Riley v. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 4:00 am
The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in, R. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 8:17 am
OHIM said that only hte city could bring such a claimKaren Millen Ltd v Dunnes Stores [2007] in the High Court of Ireland where Karen Millen's original purple low-V neck top and a striped princess cut button-down shirt was the subject of the dispute. [read post]
10 Sep 2023, 12:57 pm
In Missouri v. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 1:32 pm
Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Salman v. [read post]
31 Aug 2018, 1:52 pm
Carello v. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 9:57 am
The Changing Landscape for Marketing Health and Nutrition Benefits, Part 2 Anne V. [read post]
15 Dec 2013, 2:16 pm
A presumptive risk level of 1 (low risk), 2 (moderate risk), or 3 (high risk) is calculated for an offender by adding up the points assigned to the offender in each category. [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 9:25 am
Vicarious liability is about spreading—making the person with least incentive/low marginal utility of money pay. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 8:19 am
Virag, SRL v. [read post]
2 May 2019, 10:48 am
There has been a lot of important innovation since AIA - blockchain and AI to name but a couple of key areas, and the PTAB is important for getting rid of the “low hanging fruit” in terms “bad” patents. [read post]
21 Oct 2015, 1:06 pm
The compensation amount under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(iii) remains unchanged at $215,000.The Code provides that the $1,000,000,000 threshold used to determine whether a multiemployer plan is a systematically important plan under section 432(e)(9)(H)(v)(III)(aa) is adjusted using the cost-of-living adjustment provided under Section 432(e)(9)(H)(v)(III)(bb). [read post]
23 May 2016, 5:10 am
Zauderer v. [read post]
18 Mar 2014, 9:18 am
Aug. 21, 2013) and Alton v. [read post]
8 Dec 2020, 6:02 am
The first and third questionsIn terms of assessing ‘genuine use’, the CJEU first noted that, according to Ansul BV v Ajax Brandbeveiliging BV (C–40/01), the fact that a mark is not used for goods newly available on the market but rather for goods that were sold in the past does not mean that its use is not genuine. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 10:26 am
Apple says in today's submission that Apple I and Apple II "cannot be reconciled with eBay Inc. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 4:59 am
The property owners hold beneficial title to their buildings, which provide subsidized, affordable housing to low-income families and low-income senior citizens who reside therein. [read post]
3 Mar 2019, 8:20 pm
This sentiment was supported by Justice Binnie in R. v. [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 8:33 am
Reg. 386/18 (“Regulation”) under the Climate Change Mitigation and Low-carbon Economy Act, SO 2016, c 7 (“CCMLE Act”). [read post]
