Search for: "Davis v. Advantage Intern., Inc." Results 1 - 20 of 40
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Dec 2020, 5:00 pm by Michael Douglas
By Dr Sarah McKibbin In the recent decision of RCD Holdings Ltd v LT Game International (Australia) Ltd,[1] Davis J of the Supreme Court of Queensland dismissed proceedings brought in breach of an exclusive jurisdiction clause that had been expressed in ‘an arm’s length agreement reached between commercial entities’.[2] In deciding whether to exercise his discretion not to stay or dismiss proceedings, Davis J examined whether procedural… [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 10:14 am by Dennis Crouch
The Federal Circuit panel's approach here follows the lead of KSR International Co., v. [read post]
6 Jan 2019, 8:24 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
Cooke Enterprises Inc. and Phoenix Interactive Design Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 4:45 am by Edith Roberts
’” Finally, in Amgen Inc. v. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 6:00 am by David Kris
  International agreements could help reduce this dissonance, and rationalize surveillance rules to promote international commerce, law enforcement, protection of civil liberties, and the worldwide rule of law. [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
And it is true that many practical advantages may follow from this statement of purpose. [read post]
6 Feb 2009, 7:00 am
- Amsterdam Court of Appeal rules in favour of Hachette Filipacchi Press, publisher of Elle magazine, in trade name/trade mark infringement litigation brought by clothing company WE Netherlands (Class 46)   Poland District Administrative Court in Warsaw: ALDO S and ALDI not similar (Class 46)   South Africa More on the Springbok emblem (Afro-IP)   Sweden Appeal Court rules on reproduction of album cover artwork in case against Åhléns… [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 1:47 pm
(Braintree, MA; Denny Zheng, President) Advantage Pest Control, Inc. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 9:55 am by Geoffrey Rapp
Gittleman, Casenote, Home field advantage: determining the appropriate "turf” for Williams v. [read post]