Search for: "Exploration Co., Ltd. v. United States" Results 1 - 20 of 86
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Feb 2019, 4:27 am
Norton & Co Ltd [1996] RPC 76 and Gillette Safety Razer Co v Anglo-American Trading Co (1913) 30 RPC 465 as precedent for this.However, according to HHJ Hacon "in modern practice this is not strictly a standalone defence to infringement". [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:26 pm
Peter Checkland, Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Chichester : John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 1999) is then a critical element in the way in which the legal system (in this case of the United States) interacts with the world, both as a legal and as a socio-economic-political actor. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 3:00 am by Ted Folkman
It obtained an award from a London arbitral tribunal against three Chinese companies, Dalian Dong Zhan Group Co., Beitai Iron & Steel Group Importing & Exporting Co., and Hong Kong Dongzhan Logistics Ltd., for breach of a maritime contract. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 12:23 pm
*****PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATE Never too late 35 [week ending Sunday 1 March] – EPO v SUEPO | Supreme Petfoods Ltd v Henry Bell & Co (Grantham) Ltd | UK IPO on EPO | Scents and copyright | GIs under scrutiny | UPC test-drive | Is UK failing to protect innovation? [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 4:36 am by Larry Catá Backer
While there appear to be no clear answers to me (for those with different or more elaborate views I welcome comments), I explore the possibility of such a state of "statelessness" in the materials that follow.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Before the 16th century in Europe, states were an important component of a complex system of governance, over territory, individuals, beliefs, customs and the like. [read post]
26 Feb 2013, 8:30 am by WOLFGANG DEMINO
Co., 196 S.W.3d 774, 780-81 (Tex. 2006) (orig. proceeding); see also Austin Commercial Contractors, L.P. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2013, 8:30 am by WOLFGANG DEMINO
Co., 196 S.W.3d 774, 780-81 (Tex. 2006) (orig. proceeding); see also Austin Commercial Contractors, L.P. v. [read post]