Search for: "Gill v. Wells" Results 121 - 140 of 351
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Oct 2017, 2:48 pm by Joseph Fishkin
  On the other hand, I am very confident that no intervention the Court could make in Gill v. [read post]
27 Nov 2017, 4:03 am by Edith Roberts
At In a Crowded Theater, Erica Goldberg suggests that “[c]ataloging some of the instances where courts incorporate math helps illuminate how the Court should proceed in Gill v. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 9:25 am by Don Cruse
Rehearing granted in the controversial Exxon well-plugging cases Exxon Corp. and Exxon Texas, Inc., No. 05-0729 (more info) Exxon Corp. and Exxon Texas, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 2:33 am
 EssaysWas the Supreme Court right in Actavis v Eli Lilly to introduce a doctrine of equivalents when determining infringement of patents in the UK? [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 4:18 am by Edith Roberts
At Yahoo News, Roger Parloff reports that the court’s decision whether to “wade into the inherently political quagmire of district mapping” in Gill v. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 6:41 am by Ruthann Robson - Guest
 Considering DOMA Section 3, federal district judge Joseph Tauro in Gill v. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 9:19 am by MacIsaac
” 11           In Gill v. [read post]
7 Jun 2009, 3:02 am
Gilles de Kerchove, the EU antiterrorism chief, stated the obvious when he excused the agreement's limitations: Guantánamo is a source of radicalization. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 11:08 am by Ted Folkman
Department of Health and Humans Services and Gill v. [read post]
24 Mar 2018, 12:12 pm by Gritsforbreakfast
The US Supreme Court issued a unanimous benchslapping to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Ayestas v. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 2:18 pm
 For the record, earlier Sky v Avalon interim injunctive relief litigation, here, was the subject of a helpful guest Katpost by Gill Grassie, here.Hot technology: a car batterythat fits your LEGO set? [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 3:04 pm
From Gill Grassie (Brodies LLP) comes news, via the Scotsman, of an unseemly spat over a literally iconic name, together with what looks like a workable and mutually beneficial outcome: The original St Andrew "For fans of golf the name "St Andrews" will be a well known one and to some will regard it as 'the home of golf' -- but should that name be owned by any one party as a trade mark? [read post]