Search for: "In re Pers. Restraint of Scott"
Results 1 - 20
of 21
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Apr 2015, 6:03 am
Just ask Scott Turow and our very own David Lat. [read post]
24 Mar 2013, 9:56 pm
In another case, In re K-Dur, the 3d Cir. applied stricter antitrust scrutiny, holding that such settlements are subject to "quick look rule of reason analysis" that treats "any payment from a patent holder to a generic patent challenger who agrees to delay entry into the market as prima facie evidence of an unreasonable restraint of trade, which could be rebutted by showing that the payment (1) was for a purpose other than delayed entry or (2) offers some pro-competitive benefit."… [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 8:24 am
Key Facts At Issue In Scott Plaintiffs in Scott asserted nearly identical class claims as in the Dukes litigation. [read post]
12 Jul 2022, 1:32 pm
None seem massively important in legal terms, but I can promise at least two or three jaw drops per judgment, and you may find you have spent days down the rabbit holes. [read post]
16 Jan 2007, 4:04 am
Miles and the Court's subsequent erosion of per se liability for vertical restraints, the most pervasive justifications for and against minimum RPM per se illegality, and finally, several alternative rule-of-reason formulations available to the Supreme Court should it eliminate per se treatment for minimum RPM.
Tax TipsWednesday, January 10, 2007By Sidney KessSidney Kess, CPA-attorney, consulting editor to CCH Inc., author and lecturer,… [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 7:01 am
Ct. of Common Pleas, 2010-Ohio-1533 (2010) (“Although prior restraints are not unconstitutional per se, there is a heavy presumption against their constitutional validity. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
Indeed, Jackson and Arnold launched an extended era (1937-1974) in which federal antitrust policy became increasingly stringent, inflexible, and unforgiving of business conduct. 1943-1974: Per Se Rules Become Rampant With support from FDR’s Supreme Court appointees, among others, per se rules came to dominate the substance of antitrust, rendering automatically illegal all vertical restraints, numerous patent-licensing practices, and even joint ventures. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 12:28 am
At the very end, if they were to have standing and to prove harm, there would be the question of whether they're entitled to an injunction. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 4:37 pm
A few years ago, I started putting artificial restraints on my workdays. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 11:54 am
Self-restraint, my friends. [read post]
13 Mar 2022, 9:41 am
Worst of all, they also refused to divulge the purchase price–even though we're talking about public money. [read post]
18 Oct 2017, 4:30 am
Hathaway and Scott J. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am
Universal Pictures Corporation, 45 F.2d 119 (2nd Cir. 1930), per Learned Hand J. [read post]
21 Sep 2007, 11:50 pm
" In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 86, 101,2 L. [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
It also embodies a so-called “precautionary principle”—allowing conduct posing a relatively remote anticompetitive risk to be prohibited due to any long-run tendency to produce some form of restraint. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 1:13 am
I suppose it is possible that as a consequence of the proposed change in laws, media companies from all over the world will re-locate to Iceland which will become the Silicon valley of the media. [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 11:07 pm
The problem is that the test of physical restraint or submission to authority is limited to unambiguous shows of authority: an officer frisking suspicious characters in Terry or chasing down a fleeing hoodlum in Hodari. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 9:30 am
Take, for example, the Sherman Act, which makes illegal agreements in restraint of trade.4 How should a court proceed if a defendant claims that the agreement he made with his codefendant is speech protected by the First Amendment even if it’s in restraint of trade? [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 8:59 am
Scott Paper Co. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am
Civ. 1ère, No. 13-23566.March was all about the 'Blurred Lines' in copyright and a US Jury's decision to award $7.3 million to the Estate of Marvin Gaye on the basis that Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke’s soul-inspired pop song "Blurred Lines" too closely mirrored Gaye’s 1977 single "Got to Give It Up". [read post]
