Search for: "Phillips v. Cooper"
Results 61 - 80
of 185
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2017, 3:15 am
In Cooper v. [read post]
10 Apr 2022, 4:56 pm
Last Week in the Courts On 4 April 2022, there was application in the case of QRT v JBE before Saini J. [read post]
22 Aug 2012, 5:22 am
Murphy, Drew Alan Phillips, Jeffrey Puglisi, Daniel Sullivan, Tracey Ann Valenzuela and Christopher Quang Vo. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 12:52 pm
The Manageable Nationwide Class: A Choice-of-law Legacy of Phillips Petroleum Co. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 1:45 am
"Jeremy Phillips - shaking up the IP world with sharp analysis and casual humor since 1973Our dear blogmeister Jeremy Phillips came to podium with 41 years of experience in IP in his belt and introducing "Phillips's Three Rules of Change". 1. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 6:25 pm
” (Naturist Action Committee v. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:11 am
Today’s live blog team comprises Lucy Hayes (Olswang), Anna Phillips (Nabarro), James Gliddon (CMS), Tom Sandeman (Nabarro), Emma Boffey (CMS) and Iona Millership (Olswang). 16.00 The Lord Advocate has now concluded his submissions for today. [read post]
4 Dec 2011, 4:04 pm
Cooper v Turrell, heard 24 November 2011 (Tugendhat J) McKeown v Attheraces Ltd, heard 28 November 2011 (Eady J) Phillips v NGN, heard 28 and 29 November 2011 (Judge CJ, Neuberger MR, Kay V-P) El-Naschie v Macmillan, heard 11, 14, 16 to 18, 21, 22, 25, 28-30 November, 1 -2 December 2011 (Sharp J) Also on Inforrm last week News: Defamation in Israel – are the proposed amendments to the law objectionable? [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 3:00 am
, 88 F.3d 271, 273 (4th Cir. 1996) (collecting cases and finding that an EUO clause is broad enough to encompass financial information); Phillips v. [read post]
24 Jun 2015, 6:13 am
Phillips v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 8:09 am
Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 5:46 am
(IP Dragon) Denmark Denmark’s new transfer pricing IP valuation guideline (IP finance) Europe ECJ: COLOR EDITION – the A-G delivers his opinion on the application by Lâncome: Lancôme v OHIM and CMS Hasche Sigle (Class 46) ECJ: Diesel ruling affirms that exhausting still trumps trademarks, but consent must be unequivocal: Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV, Metro Cash & Carry BV and Remo Zaandam BV v Diesel SpA… [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 4:46 am
(IP Dragon) Denmark Denmark's new transfer pricing IP valuation guideline (IP finance) Europe ECJ: COLOR EDITION - the A-G delivers his opinion on the application by Lâncome: Lancôme v OHIM and CMS Hasche Sigle (Class 46) ECJ: Diesel ruling affirms that exhausting still trumps trademarks, but consent must be unequivocal: Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV, Metro Cash & Carry BV and Remo Zaandam BV v Diesel SpA (Class 46) (IPKat) CFI: KINDER vs TIMI… [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 4:46 am
(IP Dragon) Denmark Denmark's new transfer pricing IP valuation guideline (IP finance) Europe ECJ: COLOR EDITION - the A-G delivers his opinion on the application by Lâncome: Lancôme v OHIM and CMS Hasche Sigle (Class 46) ECJ: Diesel ruling affirms that exhausting still trumps trademarks, but consent must be unequivocal: Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV, Metro Cash & Carry BV and Remo Zaandam BV v Diesel SpA (Class 46) (IPKat) CFI: KINDER vs TIMI… [read post]
11 Mar 2008, 8:46 am
Phillips, No. 07-0522 Grant of habeas petition ordering conviction be vacated based on state's Brady violation is vacated in part as to barring of retrial of count of depraved indifference murder as petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies with respect to that relief. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 6:22 pm
A: One of the first cases was FTC v. [read post]
27 May 2012, 5:42 pm
(Mrs Laura McQueen v Daily Record, Clause 5, 24/05/2012). [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
Emody v. [read post]
18 Sep 2013, 7:28 am
and the speakers are the all-too-infrequent IP Finance blogger Anne Fairpo (13 Old Square) and Kevin Phillips (no relation to this blogger) of Baker Tilly. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 11:15 pm
In last week’s judgment in Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22, the Supreme Court decided that the words ‘judicial authority’ in s 2(2) of the Extradition Act 2003 include prosecutors as well as courts. [read post]
