Search for: "Vu v. United States "
Results 141 - 160
of 161
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Mar 2024, 5:02 am
The United States has submitted a draft resolution to the U.N. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 10:00 am
Two different views (Hal Wegner) Spain Motion to amend penal code on IP rights (International Law Office) Morocco Morocco signs up for Trademark Law Treaty (Afro-IP) Poland District Administrative Court in Warsaw rules ‘heritage’ has no distinctive character in dispute between Zygmunt Piotrowski and Heritage Films (Class 46) Some simplified seizures stats for 2008 (Class 46) South Africa High Court order restrains Eastwood(s) Tavern… [read post]
9 Mar 2012, 8:00 am
” (Judicial Division of the Council of State, 11 May 2011, 201011782/1/V1) The second example concerns a Palestinian gay from the United Arab Emirates (UAE). [read post]
12 Sep 2011, 9:30 am
[Rome] : Food And Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2011.S494.5.A43 C5 2011International LawInter-American cooperation at a crossroads / edited by Gordon Mace, Andrew F. [read post]
12 Jul 2021, 8:45 am
So when Trump sued YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter on Wednesday….wow, deja vu. [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 6:52 am
United Airlines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471 (1999); and Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 1:23 pm
In fact, the United States on an annual basis drills more oil and gas wells than any other country on earth. [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 11:48 am
The opposite was true in the United States, as Kahn Freund would often say. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 9:00 am
(Afro-IP) United Kingdom EWHC: Independent consultant held jointly liable for infringement: MMI Research Ltd v Cellxion Ltd (PatLit) Can THE JOURNAL ever be distinctive for a journal? [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 6:04 am
The case ran through much of the decade, starting with efforts early in the decade to get an allegedly infringing site removed, court battles with Google over the breadth of a takedown order, and follow-up litigation over whether the order could be enforced in the United States. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 9:46 am
First, given that the Bon Bon Song had only recently been released in the United States, and not in Australia at the time of the publication of the Mixed Bon Bon Song on the Suave Website, there will have been a class of listeners who, upon listening the Mixed Bon Bon Version for the first time through the Suave Website, would have presumed that the altered section formed part of the authentic, original Bon Bon Song. [read post]
11 Jul 2015, 4:35 am
., et al. v. [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 5:00 am
(IP finance) Global - Trade Marks ICANN body releases final report on new gTLDs (Managing Intellectual Property) Procedural ambivalence in jurisprudence of WIPO’s panels regarding domain name disputes: Google v Herit Shah (Class 46) Will Facebook give away vanity URLs in a landrush? [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 5:00 am
(IP finance) Global - Trade Marks ICANN body releases final report on new gTLDs (Managing Intellectual Property) Procedural ambivalence in jurisprudence of WIPO’s panels regarding domain name disputes: Google v Herit Shah (Class 46) Will Facebook give away vanity URLs in a landrush? [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
12 Nov 2013, 6:29 am
Déjà-vu. [read post]
Italy's Constitutional Referendum: A View From Italy in Conversation With Flora and Alessandro Sapio
3 Dec 2016, 7:43 pm
This post considers the constitutional referendum in broader context of the techniques and management of democratic engagement in Western liberal states. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 7:05 am
B&B Hardware v. [read post]
11 Jan 2008, 10:09 am
Cox, alluding to the AFSCME v. [read post]
7 Jun 2017, 2:30 pm
Committee analyses note that this bill was modeled after the recent measure passed in the United Kingdom that requires employers with 250 or more employees to publish their gender pay figures by April 2018. [read post]
