Search for: "Matter of Beers v Beers"
Results 1 - 20
of 614
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jun 2024, 4:00 am
In Rumsfeld v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 3:46 am
Retrobrands America LLC v. [read post]
8 Mar 2024, 3:28 am
Norah did not win or place in the top 3, but that's not what truly matters, is it? [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 11:01 am
The PTAB relied on CyberSource Corp. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 4:06 am
Oregon Grain Growers Brand Distillery Inc. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 10:59 am
Beer Nuts, Bulls’ Eye v. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 8:30 am
Check out Gamboa v. [read post]
15 Jan 2024, 10:30 pm
The advertising ban at issue does not appear comparable to an advertising ban on alcohol where in most Member States there is particular local production of beers or wines that may be more familiar to local consumers. [read post]
11 Jan 2024, 1:00 pm
Woolard admitted that he had consumed a couple of beers. [read post]
4 Jan 2024, 8:21 am
State v. [read post]
3 Jan 2024, 7:15 am
State v. [read post]
22 Dec 2023, 12:40 pm
Reference: People v. [read post]
20 Dec 2023, 12:09 pm
They had gone to a convenience store to get some beer. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 4:00 am
Beer [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 7:39 am
Jackson contended that CHATEAU LA GORDONNE is a house mark and VÉRITÉ DU TERROIR is "its own unitary composite product name," and therefore the presence of the CHATEAU LA GORDONNE portion does not avoid confusion as a matter of law because both marks contain the term VÉRITÉ. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 8:16 am
For example, in DeHoog v. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 6:50 am
Gunaratna v. [read post]
1 Aug 2023, 7:46 pm
No matter the cause of the trend, the Court found that Congress decided to “clamp down with vigor on mergers,” quoting U.S. v. [read post]
