Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 321 - 340
of 8,237
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2019, 2:20 am
Rien Broekstra and Gaëlle Béquet of Brinkhof (Amsterdam), who represent Wiko in the parallel Dutch litigation, are the authors.On 30 October, the higher regional court (“OLG”) of Karlsruhe handed down its first decision on the merits on FRAND (case number 6 U 183/16) since the landmark CJEU ruling in Huawei v. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 1:15 pm
Something like: "For the reasons stated below, the petition is denied. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 9:31 pm
Robert Nattress & Associates v. [read post]
14 Mar 2018, 2:00 am
Prior to enactment of the law, trade-secret holders could only sue in state court for misappropriation of their trade secrets. [read post]
11 Sep 2017, 8:11 am
”) State ex rel. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 1:01 pm
Citizens v. [read post]
26 Jul 2013, 12:24 pm
The court dismissed claims under certain state consumer statutes, as well as claims based on the laws of states in which no plaintiffs lived. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 5:00 am
In Lawrence v. [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 2:40 am
In its decision on the case Johannes Gerrit Cornelis van Schaik v Hoge Raad der Nederlanden in Para 21 the Court has ruled that: ...Article 4 of the directive further provides that the roadworthiness tests, within the meaning of the directive, are to be carried out by the State or by bodies or establishments designated and directly supervised by the State. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 5:40 am
United States, 507 U.S. 234, 242 (1993)). [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 7:30 am
In Creative Ventures, LLC v. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 9:35 am
The United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Missouri v. [read post]
30 Oct 2014, 4:15 am
In Nguyen v. [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 1:58 pm
So he's had seven additional years in the United States. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 9:22 am
Wasserman Rajec* In Impression Products, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Dec 2021, 12:02 pm
The notice must state that any holder of the contract is subject to all claims and defenses the consumer could assert against the seller of the financed goods or services, and that the consumer’s “recovery [under the contract] shall not exceed amounts paid by the debtor [under the contract]. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 2:45 pm
Dist. v. [read post]
4 Apr 2009, 5:00 am
In Gantler v. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 12:07 pm
And it just doesn't seem like a tenable situation to have the United States say: "If you're on the list, even if we're wrong, there's nothing you can do about it. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 1:00 pm
” Caldwell v. [read post]
