Search for: "US v. Monte Baker" Results 1 - 16 of 16
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Apr 2014, 11:01 am
As is to be expected, in her opinion, Judge Collyer relies heavily on the Supreme Court case of Smith v. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 5:00 am
American Honda Motor Co., 856 P.2d 196, 199-200 (Mont. 1993); Deere & Co. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
 Most warnings concern a product’s use – that if you use (or don’t use) the product in a certain way, you are likely to get hurt; and if you follow the warning, you won’t. [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 11:29 am by Eugene Volokh
An injunction, on the other hand, would be a useful remedy, because even judgment-proof speakers are not jail-proof. [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 12:48 am
Anyway, take it from those of us who have been on the receiving end. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 1:36 pm
(IPKat) EU favours disclosure of computer patents before standards are set (Intellectual Property Watch) Trade Marks Court of First Instance finds RAUTARUUKKI fails to satisfy acquired distinctiveness criterion: Rautaruukki Oyj v OHIM (Class 46) Court of First Instance finds original signature of famous Italian lutist Antonio Stradivari, in arte Stradivarius, of the 17th century, cannot be read by relevant consumers: T‑340/06 (Catch Us If You Can!!!) [read post]
21 May 2018, 3:15 am by Peter Mahler
Here’s how a judge on Montana’s Supreme Court answered the question in sizing up the parol evidence rule in Baker v Bailey, 240 Mont. 139 [Mo. 1989]: As this case illustrates, application of the rule can work to create harsh results. [read post]
31 Dec 2022, 10:34 am by Christopher J. Walker
  Speakers: Shalanda Baker (Director of the Office of Economic Impact and Diversity and Secretarial Advisor on Equity, U.S. [read post]