Search for: "VOLKSWAGEN CANADA VOLKSWAGEN CANADA INC." Results 1 - 20 of 31
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Dec 2008, 3:38 pm
The e-mails are flying today over the Federal Circuit's decision today to grant a petition for mandamus transferring a Marshall patent case between a Michigan plaintiff and defendants from Ohio and Canada in IN RE TS TECH USA CORPORATION, TS TECH NORTH AMERICA, INC., and TS TECH CANADA, INC.. [read post]
7 Jan 2022, 9:34 am by admin
January 7, 2022 On January 6, 2022, the Competition Bureau (Bureau) announced that it had negotiated a consent agreement with Keurig Canada Inc. [read post]
26 Feb 2017, 12:35 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The sixth case was brought in Canada against Volkswagen AG, which does not have securities listed on a Canadian exchange. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 4:00 am by Administrator
Groupe Volkswagen du Canada inc., 2022 QCCS 2186 (CanLII) [65] Le dénouement du présent dossier cadre très bien avec le concept de mesure réparatrice. [read post]
21 Jul 2016, 9:30 pm by Justin Daniel
Canada’s Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Catherine McKenna, reportedly announced that Canada will implement a national tax on carbon—McKenna has described carbon pricing as “one of the most efficient ways to reduce emissions,” and one that capitalizes on the “emerging low-carbon economy. [read post]
5 Jan 2009, 12:24 pm
"- finally, in an effort to justify its decision that this was a "clear abuse of discretion," the Federal Circuit compared the TS Tech case with the Fifth Circuit's most recent leading venue case, In re Volkswagen of Am., Inc., and after listing the factors from that case that favored the same finding (including that the district court "glossed over the fact that not a single relevant factor favored the plaintiff's chosen venue") stated that… [read post]
8 May 2019, 4:50 am by Administrator
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects) The most-consulted French-language decision was Volkswagen Group Canada Inc. c. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 4:25 am
Becton, Dickinson and Co (case no. 2009-1511) (Patently-O) CAFC: Jury wrong on anticipation; but claims are obvious as a matter of law: Therasense, Inc. [read post]