Search for: "Merchandising Productions Inc." Results 181 - 200 of 839
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 May 2016, 7:32 am by David Aronberg
Recently, the Commission announced the recall of certain pacifiers, LatchTM Lightweight Pacifiers and Clips, manufactured by Munchkin, Inc., because of the potential for a choking hazard It should be noted that this recall was voluntary, i.e., Munchkin voluntarily issued a recall on the pacifier because of reports of a choking hazard attendant to foreseeable use of the product. [read post]
“Copyright Triumph International Inc, under license to Bravado Merchandising. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 12:55 pm by Andrew Hamm
Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. 20-355Issue: Whether the U.S. [read post]
3 Jan 2007, 5:25 am
  But, sure enough, there's actually a decision from our state's highest court, refusing to characterize the sale of outdated merchandise as a "deceptive or misleading" business practice.In Matter of Food Parade, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 9:28 am by Ann
Since the arrival and success of the Bratz empire, Barbie merchandise had suffered a noticeable slide in sales. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 10:23 am by Wolfson & Leon
Publix Super Markets, Inc., commonly known as Publix, is a beloved grocery store chain with a rich history in Florida. [read post]
28 Jan 2008, 6:04 am
But digital playgrounds for the juice-box set — such as Disney’s Club Penguin and Ganz Inc. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 3:38 pm by rreeves
The companies involved in the recall include: J.C Penney Purchasing Corp. of Piano, Texas - 2.2 million Roman shades and 340 rollup blinds Wal-Mart Stores Inc, Bentonville, Ark -600,000 roll-up blinds and 500,000 Roman shades Pottery Barn, Pottery Barn Kids, and PBteen division of Williams-Sonoma Inc, of San Francisco - 305,000 Roman shades and 45,000 roller shades international Merchandise of Columbus, Ohio - 355,000 Deluxe Matchstick Roll-up Shades Lotus & Windoware… [read post]
3 May 2010, 10:16 am
 Finding no direct infringement because eBay does not produce a competing “product,” the Court of Appeals looked to the Inwood Test (Inwood Lab., Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2007, 6:38 am
Forever Living Products U.S., Inc., 2007 U.S. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 8:16 am by Kristi L. Wolff
This case could signal the start of greater scrutiny on the frequency with which brands market products with identical formulas into different segments, and whether those products are sufficiently differentiated to justify varying price points. [read post]