Search for: "State v. Furrow"
Results 1 - 20
of 27
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Feb 2010, 3:09 am
The IPKat has heard from a discreet informant (he used to say he heard it from a little bird, but nowadays that makes some folk assume it was a Tweet) that there is a new reference for a preliminary ruling on an IP issue which will be furrowing the earnest brows of Europe's Greatest. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 8:23 pm
” Then why the furrowed brows? [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 3:45 am
In State v. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 9:36 am
When it comes to raising the furrow of one’s copyright brow, few cases in recent years have done a more effective job than the judgment in Levola Hengelo v. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 8:14 am
The beginning of this month marked the 45th anniversary of Thurgood Marshall’s term as Associate Justice in the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
6 Sep 2022, 8:13 am
" She stated that she was "in shock. [read post]
30 Aug 2020, 10:28 pm
Overview Today, landowners in the state have the right to drain their land with the natural flow of water and discharge excess water into natural watercourses. [read post]
28 Mar 2020, 11:58 am
For example, in Herrington v. [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 12:09 am
Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 10:36 am
Judging by the furrowed brows that greeted this comment, however, it seems to be an idea of low popularity. [read post]
7 Aug 2011, 11:24 pm
(Class 46) District Court of The Hague: Legal costs: Vetus v Inno Nautic (EPLAW) District Court of The Hague awards claim for ‘rest damage’: ABK Kunststoffen v Snoeks Automotive B.V (EPLAW) New Zealand NZ High Court clears patent attorneys of negligence: The Baby Hammock Co Limited v AJ Park Law (Patentology) Northern Ireland Ploughing a lonely furrow? [read post]
7 Aug 2011, 11:24 pm
(Class 46) District Court of The Hague: Legal costs: Vetus v Inno Nautic (EPLAW) District Court of The Hague awards claim for ‘rest damage’: ABK Kunststoffen v Snoeks Automotive B.V (EPLAW) New Zealand NZ High Court clears patent attorneys of negligence: The Baby Hammock Co Limited v AJ Park Law (Patentology) Northern Ireland Ploughing a lonely furrow? [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 9:49 am
Whilst policy is set by the Ministry of Justice, coroners are appointed by local authorities and are thereafter subject, on an operational level, to funding and resourcing by that authority as they plough an independent and fairly lonely furrow in isolation from their hundred or so coroner peers. [read post]
3 Jul 2021, 9:57 am
“His brow was furrowed and he was snarling? [read post]
5 Nov 2012, 3:17 pm
I scratched my head and furrowed my brow too. [read post]
5 Nov 2012, 3:17 pm
I scratched my head and furrowed my brow too. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 7:18 am
For example his website stated "Welcome to the Stalker website" and "We will be adding to our range... [read post]
3 Sep 2012, 3:56 am
Back on PatLit, David Berry considers liability for "divided" patent infringement -- and how a recent US Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit decision in BMC v Paymentech has avoided tackling it full-on. [read post]
21 Oct 2012, 8:19 am
Proponents of this fallacy (such as the sponsors of the IRFA bill) leave out the July 6, 2012 ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Intercollegiate Broadcasting System Inc v. [read post]
11 Sep 2008, 8:12 pm
See Gourdine v. [read post]
