<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Case of the Day: Lexmark International v. Ink Technologies Printer Supplies	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://lettersblogatory.com/2013/09/17/lexmark-ink-technologies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2013/09/17/lexmark-ink-technologies/</link>
	<description>The Blog of International Judicial Assistance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2024 02:18:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Ted Folkman		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2013/09/17/lexmark-ink-technologies/#comment-1443</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ted Folkman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Dec 2013 03:27:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=16192#comment-1443</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In December 2013, the court compounded its error by permitting service by email on another defendant, this time in Poland. Poland, like China, has objected to service by postal channels.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In December 2013, the court compounded its error by permitting service by email on another defendant, this time in Poland. Poland, like China, has objected to service by postal channels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sergey		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2013/09/17/lexmark-ink-technologies/#comment-1442</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sergey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2013 06:19:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=16192#comment-1442</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Lexmark violates the rights of the consumer. By purchasing Lexmark printer I paid toner and have the right to print blue and red and the device should perform their functions in the absence toner. But the device Lexmark printers so that, at completion of the one color toner unit just turns into scrap metal&#8212;is dupery! Why did not anyone sue for consumer rights?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lexmark violates the rights of the consumer. By purchasing Lexmark printer I paid toner and have the right to print blue and red and the device should perform their functions in the absence toner. But the device Lexmark printers so that, at completion of the one color toner unit just turns into scrap metal&mdash;is dupery! Why did not anyone sue for consumer rights?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
