Search for: "USA v. Rider" Results 1 - 20 of 34
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Aug 2021, 5:51 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Bank N.A., 186 AD3d at 1039 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see generally Rider, 192 AD3d at 1562). [read post]
4 Jul 2020, 9:56 am
PHOTOS: President Trump's Mount Rushmore speech"We gather tonight to herald the most important day in the history of nations: July 4th, 1776 [read post]
22 Oct 2019, 9:09 am by George Basharis
The federal district court in Minnesota properly denied Bombardier’s post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law, the Federal Circuit ruled, rejecting Bombardier’s contention that the strength of its evidence was sufficient to nullify the jury’s verdict (Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 10:53 am by Vishnu Kannan
Circuit’s decision in Qassim v. [read post]
15 Oct 2017, 7:59 pm
A recent example related to patents for skidoos where the invention turned on how the position of the rider was changed. [read post]
30 Jun 2017, 9:30 am by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
Trucks a Danger to Bike Riders in Boston and Cambridge Across the nation, trucks are a serious danger to bicycle riders and pedestrians, as discussed in a news article from Street Blog USA. [read post]
1 Mar 2017, 8:44 am by Joy Waltemath
In New York City, before drivers can use Uber’s smartphone application to find riders, they must enter an agreement with Uber subsidiary Uber USA, LLC. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 2:28 am by Ben
   This could be an interesting case - and reminds the CopyKat of the recent decision by Mr Justice Birss in Temple Island Collections Ltd v New English Teas Ltd & another [2012] EWPCC 1 where infringement was found, and the decision by a Korean appellate court that found that the 'recreation' of a photograph of a natural scene of pine trees on an island set against a skyline could not be infringement - although neither of those cases took 28 years to… [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 4:48 pm by Larry
We know that because the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said so in Bauer Nike Hockey USA v. [read post]