Search for: "Cook v. Advertiser Company"
Results 101 - 120
of 167
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Dec 2015, 8:20 am
We can’t justify these rulings, except to say that sometimes the rats win the rat race, and the goose that laid the golden egg gets cooked. [read post]
Justices argue over text (and ceviche) in ruling that Alaska Native corporations are “Indian tribes”
27 Jun 2021, 6:41 pm
The case, Yellen v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 5:01 am
(Docket Report) District Court N D California: False advertisement through third parties may constitute false marking, but facts must be pled with particularity: United States of America, ex. rel., et. al. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2022, 3:22 am
Already at the TRO/PI stage she expressed her discomfort with a decision in Epic v. [read post]
30 Jan 2011, 5:29 pm
Cook, 598 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. 2010). [read post]
24 Apr 2013, 8:31 am
Law: US v. [read post]
31 May 2021, 9:41 am
Tex.) in Corsi v. [read post]
2 Oct 2023, 6:33 am
Cook that The Western Union Co. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 11:33 am
Satterfield v. [read post]
25 Sep 2020, 9:34 am
And there are some companies that says that it’s gonna make it more difficult for people to provide their services. [read post]
5 May 2016, 3:45 am
Burger King has, for decades, had Have it your Way as it’s advertising campaign. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 1:18 pm
To achieve such a result, the company enforcing the non-solicitation agreement must demonstrate a legitimate business interest exists for such an agreement. [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 10:39 am
See Fields v. [read post]
5 Apr 2013, 1:01 pm
Solo v. [read post]
4 Nov 2018, 6:10 pm
Apple CEO Tim Cook, in a speech before the European Parliament on 23 October 2018, highlighted the need for federal regulation. [read post]
24 May 2018, 7:35 am
Viacom Int’l, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 8:42 pm
By way of contrast, today’s antitrust analysis of alleged exclusionary conduct begins with (ironically enough) the U.S. v. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 2:49 pm
By way of contrast, today’s antitrust analysis of alleged exclusionary conduct begins with (ironically enough) the U.S. v. [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 1:19 pm
It is true that this was a lease granted to the company in expensive premises and a company (unlike an individual) may have limited use for such premises unless it can exploit it for value. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 5:00 am
(By the way, whatever a melting pot is, it is one of the few cooking implements not being used for our holiday barbecue.) [read post]
