Search for: "1-8 Doe"
Results 9021 - 9040
of 32,317
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Mar 2021, 10:44 pm
The Justices split 8-1. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 2:38 am
” German L.J. 16, no. 1 (2015): 105 ff. [7] ECJ, 5/30/2015, case C-459/03 Commission v Ireland, EU:C:2006:345. [8] Highlighted by B.Hess. [9] Both, commercial and investment arbitration are primarily based on the consent of the litigants, see Hess, The Private Public Divide in International Dispute Settlement, RdC 388 (2018), para 121 – in print [10] ECJ, 6/1/1999, case C? [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
Dec. 26, 2023). [2] Id. at *1. [3] Id. [4] Id. [5] Id. at *2. [6] Id. [7] Id. at *2, *4. [8] Id. at *6. [9] Id. [10] In re Philip Morris Int’l Inc. [read post]
20 May 2012, 5:08 pm
But before the Competitiveness Council meets, the AmeriKat wonders if the unitary patent fairy could grant her and the patent profession three wishes: (1) Can we please finally see the unredacted version of the Opinion of the Legal Service (document here) on the compatibility of the draft agreement with the CJEU's Opinion 1/09? [read post]
14 Feb 2007, 10:21 pm
a new item 18A is inserted into table 1 in subsection 6(2). [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 10:33 am
See 8 C.F.R. [read post]
10 Dec 2019, 6:50 pm
This is the third post-AIA Supreme Court case focusing on the no-appeal provision of 35 U.8.C. [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 11:36 am
The law does not contain an effective date and does not contemplate a delayed enforcement period. [read post]
29 Mar 2008, 3:07 pm
Does 1-16 and Arista v. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 8:51 am
Test 8: Is your strategy contaminated by bias? [read post]
25 Jul 2023, 6:27 pm
But the book does much more than that. [read post]
1 May 2024, 11:52 am
[8] § 1221(a)(1) [read post]
11 Oct 2010, 9:28 pm
DJ Hill’s article makes no mention of this requirement and does not suggest anything hinges on this. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 6:48 am
§ 507(a)(8)(A)(ii). [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 10:00 pm
§1395y(b)(8)(A). [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 5:53 am
Does 1-17*Exhibit G - RIAA surreply brief in Arista v. [read post]
16 Sep 2015, 5:18 am
It does not describe the CCP's line in its entirety. [read post]
7 May 2014, 1:00 pm
Id. at *1. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 12:52 am
The opponents relied on three earlier CTMs for goods in Class 31: (i) the word mark PINK LADY, registered for ‘agricultural, horticultural products, including fruit, grains, plants and trees, in particular apples and apple trees’; (ii) a figurative mark, depicted on the left and designating inter alia ‘fresh fruit; apples, fruit trees; apple trees’; (iii) a figurative mark (below, right) registered for ‘agricultural, horticultural products, including fruit,… [read post]
1 May 2013, 4:30 am
Id. at *8-9. [read post]
