Search for: "State v. Events Intern., Inc."
Results 1061 - 1080
of 1,852
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Sep 2014, 7:00 am
—PART V— Not all Native Advertising May Be Commercial Speech under the First Amendment If there is one thing clear from the case law, it is that the commercial speech analysis under the First Amendment is a fact intensive one that does not clearly lend itself to bright lines, especially when dealing with mixed commercial and noncommercial speech. [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 1:10 pm
Instead, the Second Circuit held that Dodd-Frank does not apply extraterritorially, and because the plaintiff failed to allege that any of the events took place within the United States, Dodd-Frank did not apply. [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 1:00 pm
At the same Tianjin panel this September, Lu Wei pointedly said to a fellow panelist, Qualcomm Inc. [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 12:52 am
Cir. 2012); Citigroup Inc. v. [read post]
20 Sep 2014, 1:06 pm
International Law, 39(4):591-653 (2008). [read post]
19 Sep 2014, 8:13 pm
’”) (internal citation omitted). [read post]
19 Sep 2014, 8:13 am
” Citing McClain v. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 11:20 am
Cir. 1996) (internal quotations omitted); see also Apple, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 11:02 am
Marriott International, Inc., expanded liability to business owners when an employee becomes intoxicated at an employer sponsored event. [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 4:26 am
NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION et al, United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, No. 06-10446-RGS. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 4:55 am
This one is Chanel Inc. v Chanel’s Salon and Chanel Jones, 2:14-cv-00304, and sees fashion and cosmetics company Chanel as plaintiff. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 4:01 pm
This is the question which the IPKat posed last Friday, on learning that Case C-661/13 Astellas Pharma Inc. v Polpharma SA Pharmaceutical Works, a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of some questions relating to the so-called Bolar exemption, which spares some sorts of use of someone else's patent for experimental purposes from being a patent infringement. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 4:14 am
The Delaware Supreme Court stirred up quite a bit of controversy earlier this year in the ATP Tours, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Aug 2014, 9:28 am
Swissport Fueling, Inc., Case No. [read post]
29 Aug 2014, 8:04 am
The case of Conrad v. [read post]
21 Aug 2014, 5:20 pm
Google contended that it was not, relying on the English decisions of in Metropolitan International Schools Ltd v Designtechnica Corporation [2009] EWHC 1765 and Tamiz v Google Inc [2012] EWHC 449. [read post]
20 Aug 2014, 11:27 am
State, 378 N.J. [read post]
19 Aug 2014, 8:51 pm
Int’l v. [read post]
17 Aug 2014, 1:22 pm
Apparel Mart also has the power to withhold payments for goods received in the event it determines that any manufacturer has breached the Supplier Code of Conduct, and ultimately to terminate the agreement for such breaches. [read post]
14 Aug 2014, 2:23 pm
In any event, keep those defense wins coming! [read post]
