Search for: "Garner v. Board of Public Works"
Results 61 - 80
of 119
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jan 2018, 7:06 am
Throughout the years, the TTAB has presided over a variety of cases presenting issues of “first impression” or which garnered significant public attention. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 7:34 am
Further consequences were felt, with online Spanish news sites garnering less traffic. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 4:36 pm
Is the ICO Offering Securities for Sale to the Public? [read post]
30 Oct 2017, 2:00 am
Morris-Garner v One Step (Support) Ltd, heard 11-12 Oct 2017. [read post]
16 Oct 2017, 1:00 am
O’Connor v Bar Standards Board, heard 4 Oct 2017. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 5:05 am
Lewis worked for many months [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 8:12 am
They thought it was fun as well as a public service to have a house scholar and author. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 5:09 am
Public policy was not on my radar. [read post]
25 Dec 2016, 10:01 pm
Acceptance of the writ, which is rare, would mean the two DeCoster v. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 5:43 am
However, unlike dysfunctional state legislatures in North Carolina and Illinois, Utah's actually works quite well and develops legislative compromises on even the most difficult areas of public policy. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 4:30 am
Although humans should always vet initial reporting from concerned citizens, tip lines, and “walk-in” sources, AITPs could conduct vital follow up work on leads that initially seem innocuous. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 8:30 am
“Just as the public does not associate the copyrighted works Nigger: The Strange C [read post]
23 Dec 2015, 8:00 am
We have had two years’ experience of the working of our test, and it has worked well. [read post]
22 Dec 2015, 2:50 pm
Under § 2(a), one of these viewpoints garners the benefits of registration, and one does not. [read post]
15 Dec 2015, 6:01 am
This Section, which is set out below, has been in the Copyright Act since 2012, when the Copyright Modernization Act was proclaimed into force and is a condition which hosting providers must comply with in order to obtain the benefit of the hosting safe harbour in Subsection 31.1(4): (5) Subsection (4) does not apply in respect of a work or other subject-matter if the person providing the digital memory knows of a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction to the effect that the person… [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 3:08 pm
I was going to just bankrupt it all and go look for work, but a [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 4:46 pm
Ryan v. [read post]
16 Sep 2015, 10:41 pm
Board of Education. [read post]
29 May 2015, 7:37 am
(See Virginia v. [read post]
31 Jan 2015, 8:24 pm
The OHCHR’s program of work for this project, to which I will contribute, is available here. [read post]
