Search for: "People v Catchings" Results 1681 - 1700 of 1,856
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Feb 2009, 7:45 am
Earlier this month I testified in Gusciora v. [read post]
10 Feb 2009, 10:52 pm
  Other people just can't do it. [read post]
10 Feb 2009, 3:58 pm
Case in point, courtesy of Eugene Volokh: a Ninth Circuit decision in United States v. [read post]
21 Jan 2009, 11:05 pm
In 2007, many of the restrictions had been struck down by a federal judge in Alexander & Catalano v. [read post]
2 Jan 2009, 3:36 pm
Lakewind  Church: man who fell when "taken by the spirit" sues his church for failing to  properly supervise the people he thought would  catch him Goodman v. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 10:42 am
  Until I read the 8th District’s decision last week in State v. [read post]
10 Dec 2008, 1:46 pm
But now that he’s in New York studying at Columbia, he says many more people are asking him about his quirky name. [read post]
6 Dec 2008, 8:15 pm
It is simply stated for the purpose of a disclosure to the parties of the chance contact.Such are the vagaries of life.Link:   Miles v. [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 3:00 pm
: Canadian voices on copyright law’ documentary produced by Michael Geist and Daniel Albahary (Michael Geist) (Coverage of the film – Michael Geist) (Techdirt) IP & the economy – never allow a crisis to go to waste (Excess Copyright) Sleeman Breweries files lawsuit against Dead Frog Brewery over Dead Frog’s use of clear glass bottle design (Canadian Trademark Blog)   China Investigation orders in IP cases (China Hearsay) Negotiating with IP… [read post]
4 Dec 2008, 6:11 am
And before some wag posts a comment about "it's a start," and compares it to Brown v. [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 1:34 pm
In an essay forthcoming in a symposium issue of the Syracuse Law Review, I argue that taken at face value, DC v. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 1:36 pm
(IPKat) EU favours disclosure of computer patents before standards are set (Intellectual Property Watch) Trade Marks Court of First Instance finds RAUTARUUKKI fails to satisfy acquired distinctiveness criterion: Rautaruukki Oyj v OHIM (Class 46) Court of First Instance finds original signature of famous Italian lutist Antonio Stradivari, in arte Stradivarius, of the 17th century, cannot be read by relevant consumers: T‑340/06 (Catch Us If You Can!!!) [read post]