Search for: "Grant v. Target Corporation" Results 161 - 180 of 1,234
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Feb 2021, 2:23 pm by Kevin LaCroix
ReWalk Robotics Ltd., 973 F.3d 22, 32-33 (1st Cir. 2020) (affirming grant of motion to dismiss because the basis for the opinion statement was disclosed and there were no contrary, non-disclosed facts); Shreiber v. [read post]
20 Aug 2016, 1:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
The court found that questions of fact common to the class predominated over individual inquiries (Hutson v. [read post]
3 Aug 2015, 4:01 pm
 Unlike some of the current members of the Patents Court, Henry is no stranger to intellectual property, a field in which he has practised since the 1980s: indeed, he is a fully-fledged member of the IP community and his exploits as a Deputy Judge have been recorded on a number of occasions on this weblog (see eg Healey v Jensen here, International Stem Cell Corporation v Comptroller of Patents here). [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
In considering the meaning of “harassment”, Rix LJ drew upon the guidance of the Court of Appeal in Thomas v News Group Newspapers where Lord Phillips defined harassment as: “conduct targeted at an individual which is calculated to produce the consequences described in section 7 and which is oppressive and unreasonable”. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 10:50 am by Julian Ku
That began to change in the 1990s when ATS plaintiffs began targeting multinational corporations. [read post]