Search for: "US v. Lloyd" Results 81 - 100 of 1,154
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Dec 2015, 4:25 pm by Steve Kalar
”) Lloyd adds welcome bite to our arguments that the government can’t use experts that were not properly disclosed. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 5:30 am by Barry Sookman
No implied license to use software affirms UKCA Lloyds TSB Insurance Services Ltd v Shanley [2014] EWCA Civ 407 http://t.co/rKO0cq37gi -> Four points for CASL readiness | All About Information http://t.co/8qIIRE3OUv -> Private copying of unlawful reproductions: CJEU says "no! [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 8:55 pm by Lawrence Solum
Lloyd Freeburn (University of Melbourne) & Ian Ramsay (Melbourne Law School - University of Melbourne) have posted What Does it Mean to 'Carry on Business in Australia'? [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 10:23 am by Nyanza Moore
The Court held that the carrier had a duty to preserve samples obtained by its investigator during its investigation and used its inherent power to sanction the carrier for pre-action destruction of evidence.1 In Allstate Texas Lloyd’s v. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 3:41 pm
Warner-Lambert Co LLC v Sandoz GmbH, Sandoz Ltd and Lloyds Pharmcacy Ltd [2015] EWHC 3153 (Pat) is the latest in a series of decisions in the ongoing patent infringement dispute over pregabalin, a generic version of Lyrica. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 1:15 pm by Donald Dinnie
The test enunciated by the English court in Kuwait Airways Corporation v Kuwait Insurance Co [1996] 1 Lloyds Rep 664, confirmed in Mann and Another v Lexington Insurance Company [2000] is no different in South African law. [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 10:56 am
  As might be expected at this point, a familiar old chestnut from Catnic Components v Hill & Smith [1982] RPC 183 was wheeled out, by reference to the more recent case of Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors UK Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1062. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 11:33 am by Peter Groves
The Trade Union Congress was influential in getting them included in the Act, and my friend Lord Lloyd of Kilgerran took the leading role (I think) in piloting them through Parliament, but they hardly ever deliver for the employee-inventor (Kelly and Chiu v GE Healthcare [2009] EWHC 181 (Pat) being the single swallow that could not make a summer). [read post]