Search for: "Sharp v. State"
Results 1901 - 1920
of 2,518
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jul 2023, 9:05 pm
And the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in National Pork Producers Council v. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 3:00 am
An appellate court decision issued last week in Lehey v. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 12:51 pm
Interestingly, their reticence to address this central jurisdictional question is at sharp variance with their counterparts in Perry. [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 6:27 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 6:35 am
All of these decisions were sharply divided and warrant sharp criticism. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 6:30 pm
A more significant free speech victory for Big Pharma was delivered by the Second Circuit in United States v. [read post]
19 Nov 2013, 9:01 pm
Consider the 1996 case of United States v. [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 9:05 pm
In SEC v. [read post]
16 Jan 2025, 6:27 am
From Tuesday's decision in U.S. v. [read post]
24 Oct 2010, 11:48 pm
Sharp Corporation, et. al (Docket Report) Stays pending patent reexamination: Sweetening the deal: TDY Industries v Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co (Patents Post Grant Blog) District Court E D California: False marking complaint alleging defendant had ‘no reasonable basis to believe’ its products were patented sufficiently pled intent to deceive: Hallstrom v. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 10:53 am
The question here, though, was whether the bedroom tax policy is “manifestly without reasonable foundation” because the bedroom tax involved a question of high policy – the Secretary of State relied on Humphreys v HMRC [2012] 1 WLR 1545, which, in turn, had applied Stec v UK (2006) 43 EHRR 1017 to argue for a different test depending on the ground of discrimination and the type of policy. [read post]
26 Nov 2016, 4:40 pm
In People v. [read post]
26 Nov 2016, 4:40 pm
In People v. [read post]
26 May 2010, 11:15 am
” Anyone who doubts his intellectual toughness and his willingness to engage in sharp debate should just take a look at his dissents over the last ten years, from Bush v. [read post]
10 Jan 2023, 12:08 pm
In Greenhouse v. [read post]
27 Mar 2009, 6:34 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: New Zealand Prime Minister announces s 92A ‘three strikes’ copyright provision will be scrapped (Excess Copyright) (Michael Geist) (TorrentFreak) (Ars Technica) (ContentAgenda) (Managing Intellectual Property) (Public Knowledge) (Excess Copyright) (IPKat) US: TomTom files countersuit against Microsoft claiming its Streets… [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 10:01 am
The constitutional importance of this point is clear: in R (on the application of Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which was cited by Lord Pannick on behalf of Gina Miller during his oral submissions, Lord Hoffmann held that ‘the unique authority Parliament derives from its representative character’. [read post]
20 Nov 2024, 1:59 am
A recent Australian decision in the case of Athwal v State of Queensland [2023] QCA 156[2] highlights the problem. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 11:10 am
., v. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 7:31 pm
See Farina v. [read post]
