Search for: "U. S. v. Marks"
Results 201 - 220
of 1,342
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Feb 2018, 4:22 am
Leder v Spiegel, 9 NY3d 836, 837 (2007) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted), cert denied sub nom. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 4:52 am
Jones Law Firm, P.C. v J Synergy Green, Inc. 2024 NY Slip Op 31127(U) April 2, 2024Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 653730/2023 Judge: Lyle E. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 10:10 pm
" Herbko Int'l v. [read post]
14 Nov 2023, 9:22 am
That’s the question the prosecutor asked a witness in State v Gibbs. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 10:23 am
This marked the first time that the government has come to the defense before the Justices of two key tactics federal judges have used in implementing the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision giving Guantanamo captives a right to go to court to seek their release. [read post]
30 Aug 2006, 5:01 am
U. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 2:45 pm
Gilead This is a follow-up to Dennis’s post discussing a recent Federal Circuit decision, University of Minnesota v. [read post]
6 Apr 2021, 11:29 am
In this case the Federal Circuit carefully applied the fact/law principles we set forth in U. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 6:56 pm
Chief Justice Warren's plurality opinion in Trop v. [read post]
22 May 2017, 9:32 am
“[U]se of the ® symbol on its registered lids cannot be a false statement of fact prior to cancellation or abandonment of that mark. [read post]
7 May 2025, 6:41 am
" Superior claimed priority and likelihood of confusion with the mark shown below, for footwear, the subject of Superior's pending i-t-u application. [read post]
13 May 2010, 7:38 am
s reliance on our decision in Brown v. [read post]
11 Sep 2011, 4:18 pm
Reversing a decision of the Regional Court of Düsseldorf, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (20 U 48/09) held that this use did not amount to genuine use of the trade mark (Article 15(1) CTMR). [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 9:38 am
Facebook and Prager U. v YouTube. [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 7:38 am
S. 419, 434 (1995) (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 7:37 am
S. 419, 434 (1995) (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
4 May 2011, 5:30 am
Supreme Court granted certiorari to yet another consumer arbitration case, CompuCredit Corp. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 6:45 am
S. 456, 464 (1996) (decisions about enforcement of “the Nation’s criminal laws” lie within the “special province of the Executive” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Buckley v. [read post]
13 Dec 2022, 4:12 am
TBL Licensing, LLC v. [read post]
31 Mar 2017, 7:49 am
Inverted U phenomenon we’re arguing for is limited to those super-strong marks. [read post]
