Search for: "J. DOE # 1" Results 901 - 920 of 14,684
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Apr 2018, 11:18 am
 [The main disputes at the SPC] 1) Procedural flaws in the No. 13584 Decision? [read post]
13 Jan 2016, 7:01 am by scanner1
KELLER TRANSPORT, INC.; WAGNER ENTERPRISES, LLC; AND DOES 1-10, Defendants. [read post]
16 Sep 2015, 3:20 am
 However, unlike the AG, the CJEU does not say expressly "without any possibility of confusion", if not when discussing at the outset the main function of a trade mark.So, the question is: has the CJEU actually answered the first question referred by Arnold J? [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 9:10 am
It also contended that the period of protection (under Article 13(1)) is determined by reference only to those marketing authorisations which fall within the scope of the protection conferred by the basic patent. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 12:35 am by Eleonora Rosati
Birss J concluded that Mr Carter was liable for copyright infringement under s16 CDPA for authorising EGPSXXX Ltd to infringe the claimant's copyright.What does this decision mean? [read post]
7 Oct 2018, 8:59 am by Omar Ha-Redeye
Therefore, allowing administrative tribunals to decide Charter issues does not undermine the role of the courts as final arbiters of constitutionality in Canada. [read post]
3 Dec 2014, 6:00 am by Jason M. Halper
The side benefits were: (i) a registration rights agreement that would permit the stockholder more easily to sell its stock in the combined entity; and (ii) an agreement by the acquirer to pay off early a loan by the large stockholder, including a 1% prepayment penalty. [read post]
15 Sep 2022, 2:56 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Department of Labor’s disclosure regulations at 29 CFR 70.26(j), OFCCP notified contractors covered by this FOIA request through a published Notice in the Federal Register, an e-mail to and it’s website. [read post]
30 Jun 2015, 3:50 am
 This describes, among other things, a Phase III trial of trastuzumab in combinations with paclitaxel and other agents, but does not disclose any results from that trial, but it does disclose the results from the Phase I and II studies.The judge considered that Baselga 97 did not enable the clinical benefit claimed in the Patent to be directly and unambiguously derived, and therefore that the claim was novel.Turning to inventive step, Arnold J set out that… [read post]
27 Apr 2007, 12:55 pm
But this exception to the warrant requirement does not grant police the unfettered discretion to take any course of action, however disporportionate it may be to the perceived exigency. [read post]