Search for: "W Smith" Results 1901 - 1920 of 3,109
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Dec 2013, 6:36 am by Marty Lederman
As I explained earlier, the crux of plaintiffs’ RFRA claims in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood is that the HHS “Preventive Services” Rule substantially burdens the religious exercise of the companies’ owners and managers by putting them to an untenable choice between their civil and religious obligations. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 9:22 am
http://www.bankruptcylitigationblog.com/uploads/file/CASTLETON-BK-SD-IN-LORCH-9-30-11.pdf … B-SDNY: Absent exigent circumstances, stay imposed per Ch 15 is coterminous w/stay in corresponding foreign proceeding. http://www.bankruptcylitigationblog.com/uploads/file/DAEWOO-BK-SD-NY-LIFLAND-10-5-11.pdf … B-IA dismisses §548(a)(1)(B) cplt under Twiqbal based on failure to adequate plead insolvency, even if FRCP 9 inapplic.… [read post]
14 Aug 2011, 11:31 pm by Marie Louise
(Docket Report) District Court W D Tennessee: Twombly and Iqbal, not Form 18, dictate pleading standard for indirect infringement: Asentinel LLC v. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 7:29 am by John Elwood
Certiorari-stage documents Opinion below (W. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 3:55 am by Marie Louise
: Samuel Smith Old Brewery v Philip Lee (trading as Cropton Brewery) (IPKat) Rhythmix – a band without a name (IPKat) PCC Page 42: Octopus-watching continues: giant squid v small fry .. and the prospect of settlement (PatLit) Past historic 1: how patents for invention came from Venice to England (IPKat)   United States US General Federal Circuit Statistics – FY 2011 (Patently-O)   US Patent Reform The estoppel disconnect of inter partes review (Patents Post-Grant) The… [read post]
30 Dec 2007, 6:23 pm
” Securing intellectual rights Intellectual property law involving video games has changed dramatically over the years, according to John W. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 5:51 pm
We therefore conclude that the Smiths have not waived their request for attorney fees and that Hayes had ample notice that the Smiths, as the prevailing party in the litigation, would be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs. [read post]
12 Feb 2021, 12:59 pm by admin
The plaintiffs’ counsel, Cranor and Smith, and CERT failed to disclose that CERT was founded by the two witnesses, Cranor and Smith, whose exclusion was at issue.[3] Many of the lawsuit industry’s regular testifiers were signatories, and none raised any ethical qualms about the obvious conflict of interest, or the conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.[4] Cranor equates WOE to “inference to the best explanation,” which reductively strips science of its… [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 12:48 am
Smith & Nephew Richards, Inc., 2000 WL 1294324, at *3 (Tenn. [read post]