Search for: "CO.1. Means"
Results 8561 - 8580
of 16,767
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2015, 11:01 am
Of Judge and Jura-prudenceJeremy reports on Whyte & MacKay Ltd v Origin Wine UK Ltd and Dolce Co Invest Inc [2015] EWHC 1271 (Ch), a decision where Mr Justice Arnold of the Chancery Division, England and Wales, addressed the possible likelihood of confusion between JURA ORIGIN for "Scotch whisky and Scotch whisky-based liqueurs produced in Scotland" and ORIGIN and ORIGINS earlier marks.* Three aspects of information: a new eventJeremy presents "Three… [read post]
18 May 2015, 1:14 am
Scheiner, Attorneys for the Injured, at 1-800-646-1210. [read post]
16 May 2015, 1:49 am
Co. [read post]
15 May 2015, 9:50 am
Morgan Stanley & Co., 2008 U.S. [read post]
15 May 2015, 7:03 am
Dow Chemical Co., 487 U.S. 1234 (1988). [read post]
14 May 2015, 7:25 pm
So is your co-ordination. [read post]
14 May 2015, 7:04 pm
Status:Tentative Draft No. 1 was presented to the membership at the 2014 Annual Meeting. [read post]
14 May 2015, 12:32 pm
Main Topics:1. [read post]
14 May 2015, 7:28 am
” Three supposed alternatives for modifying the current system are discussed: (1) mandatory clinical trials for all innovative practice, a strait-jacket approach that would harm many patients and drive cost through the roof; (2) using special boards to evaluate whether novel procedures should be approved as standard of care, which suffers from lack of good information in addition to adding another (smaller than #1) level of cost; and (3) allowing physicians and… [read post]
13 May 2015, 8:30 am
Co. v. [read post]
13 May 2015, 7:58 am
Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC, Case No. 1:13-cv-23656 (S.D. [read post]
13 May 2015, 6:09 am
Does that mean it that you can count on it to be around in 10, 20 or 30 years? [read post]
12 May 2015, 4:42 pm
Here are a few early and tentative thoughts, though of course much depends on facts that are not yet known. 1. [read post]
12 May 2015, 12:51 pm
On these questions, the Court of Appeal held that (1) compliance with a noise ordinance does not foreclose a fair argument of significant noise impacts under CEQA, and (2) factual non-expert evidence can form the basis for a fair argument with respect to noise and traffic safety impacts. [read post]
11 May 2015, 2:18 pm
All of these instantiations can co-exist. [read post]
11 May 2015, 11:30 am
§ 1125(a)(1). [read post]
11 May 2015, 6:54 am
Co., L.P.A. v. [read post]
11 May 2015, 5:00 am
This might mean decisions regarding property, child support and custody, and alimony. [read post]
10 May 2015, 5:48 pm
Generally, however, public employees may assert official immunity from suit arising from the performance of their (1) discretionary duties in (2) good faith as long as they are (3) acting within the scope of their authority. [read post]
10 May 2015, 4:09 pm
” Balandran, 972 S.W.2d at 741 n.1 (citing STEVEN PLITT, ET AL., 2 COUCH ON INSURANCE § 22.14 (3d ed. 1997); Arnold v. [read post]
