Search for: "USA V. IN"
Results 1981 - 2000
of 11,075
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Dec 2010, 10:55 am
A transcript of today’s oral argument in Chase Bank USA, N.A. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 11:22 am
The transcript in M&G Polymers USA v. [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 12:34 pm
Santander Consumer USA, Inc. is here. [read post]
3 Dec 2008, 8:17 pm
The transcript of today’s argument in Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 11:27 am
USA V. [read post]
23 Oct 2024, 7:44 pm
Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 5:41 am
Patently-O summarises and includes a link to download Global-Tech Appliances, inc. v. [read post]
13 Aug 2019, 12:36 pm
District Court for the District of Columbia’s decision to overturn USCIS’s denial (on Specialty Occupation grounds) in RELX, Inc. d/b/a/ LexisNexis USA, and Subhasree Chatterjee v. [read post]
15 Nov 2022, 7:15 pm
In their review of the articles, state parties will have to acknowledge the invocation of Articles V and VI. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 7:49 pm
USA, Inc. v. [read post]
29 May 2008, 5:55 pm
Motley Eastern District of Kentucky at Ashland 08a0197p.06 USA v. [read post]
8 May 2022, 5:00 am
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told USA Today this week that it is “possible” that Congress could pass a national ban on abortion if the leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 2:10 pm
By Andrew Wooley The Supreme Court of Texas’ recent decision in Marsh USA Inc. v. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 9:31 am
Hope Presbyterian Church of Rogue River v. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 11:27 am
USA, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Aug 2023, 1:29 am
The board’s claim construction and motivation to combine analysis were supported by the record (Shamoon v. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 7:47 am
The court found that it is inconsistent to give evidence of third-party registrations probative value but find the evidence in no way weakens the opposer’s marks and directed the TTAB to reweigh the likelihood of confusion between the marks (Bad Elf, LLC v. [read post]
24 Oct 2023, 3:33 am
The court, in affirming the judgment of a district court in Vermont, relied largely on the plain meaning of the visual arts statute to find that the obscuring of the two murals did not equate to their unauthorized “destruction” or “modification” (Kerson v. [read post]
2 May 2023, 7:49 am
The only contentions of error the inventor made were issues of claim construction, which he forfeited by not raising them at the appropriate time during the inter partes review proceeding (Driessen v. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 7:23 am
The court, in affirming a district court’s grant of a preliminary injunction freezing sales of the parody shoe, also found that the district court acted within its discretion in weighing the traditional likelihood of confusion factors (Vans, Inc. v. [read post]
