Search for: "State v. Marks"
Results 2101 - 2120
of 19,483
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 May 2016, 6:37 am
Because the Regulation merely limited the "use" of trade marks they did not strip away the trade mark owner;s right to prevent or exclude others from using their mark (citing Arnold J in Pinterest v Premium Interest). [read post]
27 Sep 2011, 6:36 pm
October 3rd marks the first day of the 2011 Supreme Court term. [read post]
13 Jul 2007, 8:51 am
Here, Mark III needed a more definite written contract with Sysco, to prevent work from being taken from Mark III and its partner in responding to the RFP, BI.Mark III Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 8:03 am
While the Sixth Circuit largely affirmed the trial court decision, the appeals court vacated a punitive damages award of $67,650 because the district court gave improper jury instructions (House v. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 2:27 pm
Coty to support the truthful use of a mark to identify the topic of discussion. [read post]
28 Oct 2017, 10:03 am
Rost v. [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 12:06 pm
However, the recent Opinion of Advocate General (AG) Bobek in case C-702/18, Primart Marek Łukasiewicz v. [read post]
4 Nov 2007, 7:49 pm
By MARK ESSIGASHEVILLE, N.C.WHEN the Supreme Court last week granted a stay of execution for a murderer in Mississippi, it imposed a de facto moratorium on capital punishment in the United States. [read post]
2 Oct 2009, 1:11 pm
Florida, which concerns the constitutionality of life without parole for juvenile criminals; United States v. [read post]
27 Apr 2017, 4:46 am
The TTAB heard oral argument on April 24th in Dave Brock v. [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 8:15 am
The value of reliance on a trade-mark registration, as opposed to prior use, stands out sharply in the recent Federal Court of Appeal of Canada case Pizzaiolo Restaurants Inc. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 8:15 am
The value of reliance on a trade-mark registration, as opposed to prior use, stands out sharply in the recent Federal Court of Appeal of Canada case Pizzaiolo Restaurants Inc. v. [read post]
4 Dec 2020, 7:38 am
AusTherapy v. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 6:00 am
” Chandris, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Feb 2010, 5:57 am
In the Second Circuit before 2009, trademark owners had difficulty protecting their marks where the competitor's link simply shows up as "Sponsored Link" on the landing page, and no other use of the mark has been made, because of the decision in 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 3:30 pm
Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.comOn June 30, 2020, the United States Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Ginsburg in “United States Patent and Trademark Office v. [read post]
8 Aug 2021, 11:55 am
Bad faith pursuant to Article 59(1)(b) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR), presupposes the presence of a dishonest state of mind or intention (Koton Mağazacilik Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret v EUIPO (C‑104/18 P)). [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 3:05 am
" Overstock.com, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 3:21 am
[Section 2(d) refusals to register the mark ECLIPSE for various goods relating to motion pictures and entertainment, in classes 9, 14, 18, 24, and 25, in view of, respectively, several class 9 registrations for the identical mark, a registration of the identical mark for watches in class 14, three registration in class 18 for ECLIPSE, ECLIPZE, and ECLIPS & Design, a class 24 registration of ECLIPSE for curtains, and a class 25 registration of the identical… [read post]
20 Apr 2022, 3:49 am
Texas Lottery Commission v. [read post]
