Search for: "P. v. Smart" Results 101 - 120 of 417
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Nov 2019, 6:05 am by Overhauser Law Offices, LLC
IMPACT THE WORLD. 5884935 ALPHA GAMMA DELTA LOVING LEADING LASTING 5884806 HEXOL 5884708 VACMAN 5884163 THE BABY FACE PLACE 5884014 ELECTRIPHI 5883920 ORGANIC ADVANTAGE 5883811 FIRE BINS 5883744 SAFE HAVEN BABY BOXES 5883607 BEN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS 5883604 BEN TIRE 5883580 P 5883400 SW 5883166 DIBBS NAVIGATOR FEDERAL CONTRACTING MADE EASY 5883077 MULEPAC PORTABLE ALL-MODE CONTAINERS 5882963 BB BECHER BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION LLC 5882891 RETHINK OUTDOOR 5882878 CLEAN EVOLUTION 5887109 HAUNTLOOK… [read post]
27 Oct 2019, 5:08 pm by INFORRM
IPSO has published a number of rulings and resolutions statements since our last Round Up: 07239-19 Heneghan v coventrytelegraph.net, 1 Accuracy (2019), Resolved- IPSO mediation 05741-19 Grant and Pitts v Mail Online, 1 Accuracy (2019), No breach- after investigation 01212-19 Ashley v The Sun, 1 Accuracy (2018), No breach- after investigation  Statements in Open Court and Apologies On 24 October 2019 there was a statement in open court [pdf] in the case of Morgan… [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 9:16 am by Nate Nead
Some recent acquisitions include United Hospital District acquiring Smart Clinic in Minnesota, Morris Hospital’s acquisition of John Bolden MS & Raja Saleem MD in Illinois, and Jonestown Family Medicine being acquired by Premier Health in Ohio [18]. [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 9:16 am by Nate Nead
Some recent acquisitions include United Hospital District acquiring Smart Clinic in Minnesota, Morris Hospital’s acquisition of John Bolden MS & Raja Saleem MD in Illinois, and Jonestown Family Medicine being acquired by Premier Health in Ohio [18]. [read post]
13 Oct 2019, 1:07 pm by Ron Friedmann
” Adding to the old adage of people, process and tech is a smart move. [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 4:56 pm by INFORRM
Last Week in the Courts As already mentioned, on 9 July 2019 Sharp P and Warby J handed down judgment in the case of HM Attorney-General v Yaxley-Lennon [2019] EWHC 1791 (QB). [read post]
16 Jun 2019, 4:34 pm by INFORRM
The ICO has fined Smart Home Protection Ltd £90,000 for making nuisance calls to people registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS). [read post]
3 Jun 2019, 11:43 am by Overhauser Law Offices, LLC
5755272 LADO 5759338 SOUND LOCKS 5759272 5753808 ROOM LAYOUT EXPRESS 5751431 FLEXMEDICS 5753707 KETO SHOT 5751122 OBI ORANGE BOX INTELLIGENCE 5751100 BELLISIMAMA 5751058 P 5750982 NEWAY 5750727 N 5750477 LL LOWE LOGISTICS LLC 5750342 ASAP TIRE 5750290 THE IT FACTORY 5750223 COLUMBUS FARMER’S MARKET 5750077 RODENTPRO.COM 5749901 V 5749890 EZABL 5749697 DINGGO 5749617 SOUTH’S B-B-Q SINCE 1992 5749505 WORLD WARRIOR MARTIAL ARTS FEDERATION 5749274 … [read post]
19 May 2019, 3:15 am by Barry Sookman
Computer and Internet Weekly Updates for 2019-05-11 https://t.co/R720lhnzPV 2019-05-12 Computer and Internet Weekly Updates for 2019-05-11 https://t.co/YzSamL5v1S 2019-05-12 Smart Devices in Criminal Investigations: How Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Can Better P… https://t.co/kZB67bZqHY 2019-05-12 Privacy class action not certified Kaplan v. [read post]
13 May 2019, 3:15 am by Barry Sookman
Computer and Internet Weekly Updates for 2019-05-11 https://t.co/R720lhnzPV 2019-05-12 Computer and Internet Weekly Updates for 2019-05-11 https://t.co/YzSamL5v1S 2019-05-12 Smart Devices in Criminal Investigations: How Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Can Better P… https://t.co/kZB67bZqHY 2019-05-12 Privacy class action not certified Kaplan v. [read post]
31 Mar 2019, 11:50 pm by INFORRM
The Center for Internet and Society blog has posted a series of comments on the California  Consumer Privacy Act [pdf] The IpKat blog has a piece by Jessica Banks “Smart watches: a helping hand or sinister culture of surveillance? [read post]
2 Mar 2019, 2:17 am
In this regard, the threshold for distinctiveness is not dependent on the public’s level of attention (Smart Technologies v OHIM, C‑311/11 P).Lack of distinctive character of the mark applied forAs regards the issue of distinctive character, the applicant maintained that the relevant public would perceive the mark as the letter ‘v’ for ‘vericiguat’ rather than a representation of a heart. [read post]