Search for: "United States v. METRO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION"
Results 1 - 20
of 28
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2014, 3:16 pm
In 1990, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Stewart v. [read post]
22 Jan 2023, 6:59 pm
The sole member followed the advice of Skadden and caused the Boardwalk MLP general partner to exercise the call right and acquire all the public units pursuant to a formula in the Partnership Agreement. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am
In its decision released yesterday in Cinar Corporation v. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 12:49 pm
In comparing the two readings what differences in approaches can one discern between that of equity as practiced outside the United States (in Australia) and in the United States.2. [read post]
24 Sep 2015, 7:30 am
Cases from your El-Masri v. [read post]
19 Mar 2023, 6:04 pm
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services had denied a doctor’s application to adjust his status to a lawful permanent resident, finding him ineligible. [read post]
5 Mar 2017, 4:05 pm
The Hoot has said that this decision by chair Ajit Pai has proved his critics right ‘by backing corporate interests and opposing net neutrality. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 8:06 am
HDEC’s corporate governance also constitutes a weak point for effective anti-corruption activities. [read post]
24 Nov 2007, 7:11 am
This list was assembled by United Cerebral Palsy. [read post]
2 Oct 2019, 10:21 am
Ramos v. [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 9:00 am
Software Pty Ltd v Bing Technologies Pty Limited (No 1) (Australian Trade Marks Law Blog) Australian Bureau of Statistics going CC, under attribution-only licence (Creative Commons) (Michael Geist) Canada Depreciation a possible ground in opposition proceedings: Parmalat Canada Inc v Sysco Corporation (Canadian Trademark Blog) Trademarks Office considers changes to opposition practice (International Law Office) Parody defence not available according to BC… [read post]
21 Apr 2020, 4:41 pm
Two current actions in the United States serve as useful illustrations. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 7:18 am
: Whirlpool Corporation v Kenwood Ltd (IPKat) EWHC (Pat): EP 258 valid in Netherlands but not UK: Novartis AG and Cibavision AG v Johnson & Johnson Medical Ltd & Ors (IPKat) EWHC (QB): When lawfully seized items can’t be retained under s 22 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (1709 Copyright Blog) United States US General Obama IP vacancies (IP Frontline) Kappos confirmation hearing set for 29 July (IP Watchdog) (IAM) (Peter… [read post]
November 30, 2009 – Environmental Law Settlements, Decisions, Regulatory Actions and Lawsuit Filings
30 Nov 2009, 9:25 am
Click Here California Appeals Court Affirms Lower Court Holding in Goodrich v. [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 1:47 pm
(Westwood, MA; Debra Nedder, President) Bay State Homes Real Estate Corporation (Woburn, MA; Karen Alderman, President) Bay State Rental Properties, Inc. [read post]
22 Mar 2010, 4:28 am
– EIPR article (PatLit) United States US Patent Reform Dr. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 7:00 am
Volkswagon-based transfer mandamus order in In re TS Tech USA (Inventive Step) (Hal Wegner) (EDTexweblog.com) (EDTexweblog.com) (Washington State Patent Law Blog) (Patently-O) (Law360) (Patent Prospector) ECJ decides Obelix too famous to be confused with MOBILIX mobile phone service: Les Éditions Albert René Sàrl v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, Orange A/S (Class 46) (IPKat) Global Global – General Moral… [read post]
24 May 2011, 6:33 pm
(pg. 14) **Note: The paragraphs above apply only to residential or condominium unit owner policies. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 11:19 am
(Celanese Corporation v. [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 1:23 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: DRM for streaming music dies a quiet death: (Electronic Frontier Foundation), (Techdirt) CAFC decides Apotex and Impax infringed AstraZeneca’s Prilosec patents: (Law360), (Patent Prospector), (Patent Docs), (GenericsWeb), CAFC upholds lower court’s decision finding USPTO was within its rights to subject a Cooper patent to… [read post]
