Search for: "Hoffman v. Hoffman" Results 1301 - 1320 of 1,513
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jul 2011, 10:10 am
However the CPS guidance quotes "DPP v McKeown, DPP v Jones ([1997] 2Cr App R, 155, HL at page 163) [where] Lord Hoffman defined a computer as "a device for storing, processing and retrieving information". [read post]
11 Nov 2009, 4:02 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: http://duncanbucknell.com/subscribe/   Highlights this week included: EU: Generics producers: Criminal sanctions can stop counterfeit drugs (IP Watch) Prandin (Repaglinide) – US: Federal Circuit grants stay of preliminary relief pending full appellate review: Novo Nordisk v Caraco (Patently-O)   General Eduardo Pisani of Bristol-Myers Squibb is the new IFPMA Director General (IP… [read post]
21 Aug 2014, 2:44 pm
  That is why the district court was correct and the Sixth Circuit is wrong in Payne v. [read post]
2 May 2019, 11:10 am
” This “opens up rather opportunistic and destructive battles on the validity of priority claims,” also referring to the Accord v RCT judgment of Mr Justice Birss. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 4:00 am by Administrator
In addition, unlike Justice Hoffman in Improver, Binnie J. did not provide specific questions, answers and directions as to how essentiality or non-essentiality were to be determined in applying the test. [read post]