Search for: "P. v. Floyd"
Results 81 - 100
of 133
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2012, 5:11 am
Co. v. [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 8:55 pm
[bumping to the front] This event, to be moderated by Professor Ellen Katz, will take place March 5 at noon at the University of Michigan Law School For those who cannot attend in person, the event will be webcast at this link. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 9:00 am
Floyd, 978 P.2d 663, 665 (Colo. 1999). [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 4:01 pm
The illustrious panel, chaired by Kevin Mooney (Simmons & Simmons), is comprised of Willem Hoyng (Hoyng Monegier), Pierre Véron (Véron and Associates ), Alice Pézard (Judge, Cour de Cassation), Winfried Tilmann (Of Counsel, Hogan Lovells), Dr. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 10:28 am
Floyd said no—individuals could always spend as much as they wanted on elections since Buckley v. [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 1:00 am
In particular, as the Court of Appeal explained: It was common ground that for an appeal on obviousness to succeed, it has to be shown that the Judge made an error of principle, see Biogen v Medeva [1997] RPC 1 at p.45. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 11:42 am
Abrams says it is Buckley v. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 4:00 pm
Supreme Court decision, Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 12:16 pm
Floyd, No. 142617-8, the Michigan Supreme Court vacated that part of its order that found a violation of People v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 4:30 am
Stuhan & Sean P. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 4:30 am
Stuhan & Sean P. [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 3:23 pm
Otro ladrillo en el muro (Pink Floyd dixit). [read post]
13 Aug 2011, 5:28 am
Kraftwerk v. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 8:30 am
Pritchard & Ors v Teitelbaum & Ors [2011] EWHC 1063 (Ch) This case forms part of the aftermath of Fineland Investments Ltd v Janice Vivien Pritchard [2011] EWHC 113 (Ch) (our report here). [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 8:30 am
Pritchard & Ors v Teitelbaum & Ors [2011] EWHC 1063 (Ch) This case forms part of the aftermath of Fineland Investments Ltd v Janice Vivien Pritchard [2011] EWHC 113 (Ch) (our report here). [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 5:33 am
” Lundbeck, for its part, took a narrower view.When reading this part of the judgment, this Kat was reminded of the discussion in Chef America Inc. v Lamb Weston Inc. 358 F.3d 1371 (Fed. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 8:13 am
Floyd Douglas J. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 11:06 am
Floyd J had found that the patent as it stood was invalid. [read post]
15 Jan 2011, 5:23 am
Pink Floyd Music Ltd & Anor v EMI Records Ltd 5. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 10:46 pm
Footnote for privacy/publicity people: this case was originally listed as P v E, apparently because of the alleged commercial sensitivity of a percentage figure in one of the clauses of the 1999 Agreement. [read post]
