Search for: "MATTER OF T L S" Results 1901 - 1920 of 9,093
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Apr 2021, 8:02 am by Florian Mueller
Apple's Small Business Program (the 15% cut) wouldn't have been implemented if not for Epic's and Spotify's efforts--and doesn't solve all the problems that alternative app stores would do away with for good. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 11:11 am by The Legal Blog
In this view of the matter it has to be held that Yadi (memo) dated 11-4-1991 and Yadi (memo) dated 3-5-1991 were issued without notice to the appellant (L&T Ltd.) and are, thus, not legal. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 11:34 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Perhaps surprising: There’s no formal deference at PTO to int’l bodies and their naming of generics: WHO int’l nonproprietary names & US adopted names council. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 4:43 am
Les Marques de l’État de Monaco (MEM), a Monegasque public-limited company which succeeded the government of the Principality of Monaco as the proprietor of the trade mark, contests OHIM’s decision before the General Court and seeks the annulment of that decision. [read post]
14 Apr 2016, 9:34 am
No matter who does your taxes, you should file them using IRS e-file. [read post]
25 Jun 2023, 10:54 am by Eugene Volokh
[Here's a draft of my article, on the constitutionality of anti-BDS laws and other related matters, forthcoming in a symposium at The University of the Pacific Law Review.] [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 1:32 pm by P.J. Blount
Télécommunication – Observation – Navigation – Défense – Exploration. [read post]
27 Nov 2015, 5:00 am
  Thus, it didn’t matter if plaintiff’s reading of the extensive federal regulations concerning clinical trials was right or not. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 5:58 am by Gilles Cuniberti
A propos de l’arrêt du Tribunal des conflits du 17 mai 2010, Inserm c/ Fondation Saugstad). [read post]
26 Feb 2009, 10:01 pm
However, if you haven't, this might be an interesting topic. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Mr L. sent three replies to the EPO’s letter to him of 16 October 2009. [read post]