Search for: "US Term Limits, Inc. v. Hill"
Results 81 - 100
of 353
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jun 2016, 6:40 am
Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc., No. 15-1062 (natural phenom case of tailoring a diet to a pet’s genomic characteristics) Tas v. [read post]
6 Aug 2018, 8:00 am
Mary Terry Carmichael v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 9:24 am
Of course, sharing your Facebook credentials with a third party is a violation of Facebook's terms of service--we all know that accessing a site in violation of its terms of service can come with stiff criminal penalties (the court even cites to US v. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 9:45 am
Hill and Cantrell v. [read post]
6 Jul 2020, 3:38 am
” We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up. [read post]
17 Nov 2018, 12:10 pm
Asserting that statistical significance is misleading because it never describes the size of an association, which the Rothman brief does, is like telling us that color terms tell us nothing about the mass of a body. [read post]
19 Mar 2011, 9:09 am
The case is Colony Insurance Company v. [read post]
21 Feb 2016, 6:26 am
Westchester Hills Golf Club, Inc. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 6:28 am
Hill, Holliday, Connors, Cosmopulos Inc., 228 F.3d 56 (2d Cir. 2000) (holding that material issues of fact existed as to whether use of the slogan “Swing Swing Swing,” playing off of the trademarked song title “Sing Sing Sing (with a Swing),” was fair use, notwithstanding holding that the slogan was not used as a mark); Louis Vuitton Malletier v. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 4:42 am
National Collegiate Athletic Association and New Jersey Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Oct 2008, 5:52 am
Did the patentee, by the use of a particular word or phrase, choose to describe his invention (and so limit his monopoly) according to the strict technical meaning of the term, or did he use it in a more descriptive and therefore less exact way? [read post]
2 Jan 2017, 12:18 pm
Rogers Communications Inc., 2011 BCSC 1196. [read post]
1 Apr 2016, 8:22 am
Lexmark International, Inc., No. 15-1189 (unreasonable restraints on downstream uses) Obviousness: Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. [read post]
30 May 2011, 5:02 am
Even if Defendants had some limited authorization, Koch contends that they acted beyond the authorization granted by breaching its website's Terms of Use. [read post]
31 May 2017, 4:59 am
Yesterday the court added a case to its merits docket for next term, granting certiorari in Husted v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 6:12 am
In "The wounded patent survived, was only just infringed, but no injunction", here, fellow Kat Darren wrote about the decision of Birss J in Smith & Nephew Plc v ConvaTec Technologies Inc [2013] EWHC 3955 (Pat), a technically detailed case which amused Merpel, who commented that a case that started off being basically about chemistry ended up being basically about mathematics. [read post]
12 Mar 2023, 4:00 am
Real Property/Sale of Goods: Sale by DescriptionEarthco Soil Mixtures Inc. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 6:07 am
Similarly, Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Sep 2021, 2:00 am
Supreme Court’s decision in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. [read post]
