Search for: "US v. Peter Smith" Results 1 - 20 of 537
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Mar 2015, 4:50 pm by INFORRM
The long running and high profile “blogger defamation” case of Baglow v Smith has been determined in the defendant’s favour. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 2:46 am
 At first instance,covered by the IPKat here, Peter Smith J (English judges usually only get a surname – unless there is another judge around with the same one, like, in this case, Sir Andrew Smith) dismissed almost all of Mattel’s claims: there was no infringement of Mattel's two SCRABBLE marks (and no passing off) by the use of SCRAMBLE or SCRAMBLE WITH FRIENDS. [read post]
17 Jun 2012, 10:40 am by INFORRM
In a judgment handed down on 14 June 2012 (2012 ONCA 407) the Court of Appeal in Ontario overturned the first instance decision in Baglow v Smith. [read post]
7 Jan 2021, 7:41 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
 The parents of 21-year-old Berman De Paz-Martinez claim that clinicians at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth Texas withdrew life-sustaining treatment from their son without consent. [read post]
21 Aug 2010, 7:35 pm by Lyonette Louis-Jacques
Law and the "Law of Nations"(Julian Ku, Opinio Juris) Prosecuting Pirates in National Courts:  US v Said and Piracy under US Law(Douglas Guilfoyle, EJIL:  Talk!) [read post]
4 Jun 2020, 2:58 am by Dennis Crouch
Peter, No. 19-1074; Enzo Life Sciences, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 2:24 am by Peter Hirtle
(by Peter Hirtle) One wouldn’t normally expect a lawsuit between a watch manufacturer (Omega) and a big-box retailer (COSTCO) about the scope of “gray-market” sales of manufactured goods to have much of an impact on libraries and archives, but the upcoming Supreme Court case of Costco v. [read post]
31 Jul 2015, 5:43 am by Steve Cornforth
The recent and brilliant judgment of Peter Smith J in Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways is a hilarious if disturbing read. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 5:41 am by Benjamin Wittes
On the merits, I agree with Judge Pauley that—at the lower court level, at least—there is just no way around the fact that Smith v. [read post]