Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 1481 - 1500
of 4,764
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Nov 2018, 10:20 am
Both sides lawyered (10+ on each side) and experted up. [read post]
25 Nov 2018, 4:29 pm
Spectrum News has covered the issue of internet sales tax and the implications for consumers. [read post]
21 Nov 2018, 8:47 pm
Nov. 20, 2018), the plaintiff alleged that Gannett Co. violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by making unsolicited phone calls. [read post]
20 Nov 2018, 8:07 am
The case is Haynes-Garrett v. [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 11:30 am
Foti Fuels, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 7:39 am
- Asolo v Red Bull. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 4:11 am
Carlton & Harris Chiropractic Inc., a dispute over “junk faxes” that asks “whether federal courts are bound to accept a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute such as the [Telephone Consumer Protection Act] without considering the validity of that interpretation,” which “has important implications for administrative law. [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 9:01 pm
It rises to the status of holy writ enshrined in the Constitution.This could potentially be used to invalidate entire areas of consumer protection law, along with financial regulations and restrictions on the use of property (such as zoning laws). [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 9:50 am
(McKenna, 104-105) (quoting Rolex Watch U.S.A. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2018, 8:46 am
Some bonehead speculated on Twitter that a justice might proceed by rescheduling rather than relisting because he or she suspects the case won’t interest the rest of the court, so there’s no point bringing it up repeatedly by relisting it; alternatively, rescheduling the case repeatedly allows the justice to make the best argument possible the very first time the case is considered at conference. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 4:09 pm
You couldn’t copy willy-nilly; you couldn’t monetize and free ride on someone else’s content without permission, and normally some form of compensation, and you couldn’t absolve yourself of all responsibility because you were a publishing platform. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 6:19 am
The San Diego Union Tribune reports that in Thompson v. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 5:16 am
Miller and Smith v. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 3:27 am
First up is Bucklew v. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 5:03 am
The three that were particularly considered concerned:Corkscrews - El Hogar Perfecto V OHIM (T-337/12);Umbrellas - Senz Technologies BV v OHIM, (T-22/13 and T-23/13); andBiscuits - Biscuits Poult SA v OHIM (T-494/12).We were reminded that the only relevant sense to design law is sight. [read post]
4 Nov 2018, 6:43 am
In the first Qualcomm v. [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 8:05 am
Brady v. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 2:23 pm
., v. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 2:20 pm
Hahn, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Colin T. [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 6:00 am
In Sorrell v. [read post]
