Search for: "Harder v. Harder" Results 1201 - 1220 of 4,382
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 May 2011, 6:25 pm by Lawrence Solum
Each also expressly rejects the idea that the amendment processes enumerated in Article V provide the sole means for "updating" the Constitution (and, indeed, each offers itself as authentically complementary to those Article V provisions such as they are). [read post]
17 Dec 2011, 11:03 am by Alasdair Henderson
Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital and Botham (FC) v Ministry of Defence [2011] UKSC 58 – read judgment. [read post]
7 Jan 2017, 6:07 am by SHG
Massachusetts has anti-SLAPP legislation, but it may prove inapplicable to this action under  Fustolo v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 6:09 am by Dan Tench
  Lord Toulson noted the frequently quoted words of Lord Hoffmann in R v Secretary of State for the Home Office, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115 that “Fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words” and said importantly that “while Lord Hoffmann said that this presumption will apply “even” to the most general words, but I would say further that the more general the words, the harder it is likely to be to rebut the… [read post]
25 Aug 2011, 7:43 am by Steve Hall
News coverage of the New Jersey Supreme Court ruling inState v. [read post]
21 Jul 2022, 8:20 am by Brian Cordery (Bristows)
The law in this regard was summarised by Arnold J in Jarden Consumer Solutions (Europe) Ltd v SEB SA [2014] EWHC 445 (Pat) at [103]: “[103] As Kitchin LJ and Sir Robin Jacob said in their joint judgment in Gedeon  Richter plc v Bayer Pharma AG[2012] EWCA Civ 235, [2013] Bus LR D17 at [61], ‘it is trite law that… the older (from the priority date of a patent under attack) a piece of prior art said to render a patent obvious, the harder it is to show… [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 9:44 am by Vera Ranieri
Getting a frivolous patent infringement demand letter in the mail can make it a whole lot harder. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 5:41 am by Florian Mueller
That's why, for example, Apple's slide-to-unlock patent was held invalid by ten different judges in three different countries.Losing a patent like slide-to-unlock or rubberbanding in Europe is a disappointment for Apple, but it has no bottom-line impact, at least not in the short term (and probably not even in the mid to long term, though it does make it harder for Apple to position itself as a breakthrough innovator and its competitors (especially those whose devices run on… [read post]