Search for: "BELL et al v. USA" Results 41 - 55 of 55
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jan 2013, 2:15 pm by Howard Knopf
Will Rogers et al get their “ring tones” tariff payments back, either via the Copyright Board or the Federal Court or both or neither? [read post]
17 Dec 2022, 4:40 am by Guangjian Tu
Summary of the Fact This case concerned a class action initiated by a former employee, Morgan against Sundance Incorporate (the owner of a Taco Bell franchise restaurant, hereinafter “Company”) regarding the arrear of overtime payment in the context of Federal law of the USA. [read post]
16 Oct 2022, 4:10 pm by INFORRM
On 12 October 2022, a statement was read in settlement of Mincione v RCS Media Group. [read post]
28 Nov 2008, 12:14 pm
: Peer International Corporation, Southern Music Publishing Co and Peermusic (UK) Ltd v Editoria Musical de Cuba (IP finance) Justice Kitchin upholds British Beer and Pub Association and British Hospitality Association appeal against decision of Copyright Tribunal on basis for calculation of fees which members have to pay for background music (IPKat) Contempt of court: the risks of false testimony in trade mark infringement proceedings: KJM Superbikes Ltd v Hinton (IPKat) (IPKat)… [read post]
30 Apr 2018, 2:31 pm by Eugene Volokh
In 2015, for instance, she spoke at a rally opposing California's new strict school vaccination bill, and was later quoted in the Sacramento Bee (David Siders et al.): When she heard at the vigil that Brown had signed the bill, Kimberly McCauley of Sacramento sat down on the steps and cried. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 6:52 am by Howard Knopf
    Case: 33921Entertainment Software Association, et al. v. [read post]
28 Jul 2008, 5:45 pm
Foods that have been sources of contamination include ground beef, venison, sausages, dried (non-cooked) salami, unpasteurized milk and cheese, unpasteurized apple juice and cider (Cody, et al., 1999), orange juice, alfalfa and radish sprouts (Breuer, et al., 2001), lettuce, spinach, and water (Friedman, et al., 1999). [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog)   Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]