<?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: Glock v. Glock, Inc.	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://lettersblogatory.com/2015/09/03/case-of-the-day-glock-v-glock-inc/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2015/09/03/case-of-the-day-glock-v-glock-inc/</link>
	<description>The Blog of International Judicial Assistance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 24 Nov 2024 00:02:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: In re Accent Delight &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2015/09/03/case-of-the-day-glock-v-glock-inc/#comment-2249</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: In re Accent Delight &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:01:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://lettersblogatory.com/?p=21170#comment-2249</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] protective order allowed the information obtained to be used in France and Singapore. Citing the Glock case, which I covered in 2015, the court held, apparently correctly, that nothing in &#167; 1782 [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] protective order allowed the information obtained to be used in France and Singapore. Citing the Glock case, which I covered in 2015, the court held, apparently correctly, that nothing in &sect; 1782 [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
