Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 2181 - 2200
of 19,833
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Aug 2012, 2:20 am
The case considered the EU policy of parallel imports, and addressed the question of whether an importer of goods bearing a registered mark into the EEA without the consent of the trade mark proprietor is entitled to defend an action for trade mark infringement on the basis that the proprietor is engaged in conduct calculated to: obstruct the free movement of goods between member states; or distort competition in the EEA market for the goods (the so called… [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 10:01 pm
It’s the invention of Arizona entrepreneur Mark Phillips, whose company hopes to hit the market by spring. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 8:54 pm
Discrimination/Retaliation*Brown v. [read post]
2 May 2017, 8:31 pm
National Science Foundation (10th Cir., April 26, 2017) (denying Craine's petition for review: his disclosures, as a former employee of Kansas State University, did not fall within the whistleblower protections of 41 U.S.C. ss. 4712)*Jackson v. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 5:01 pm
Smith's Food and Drug Centers, Inc. (10th Cir., November 7, 2017) (affirming dismissal of Rael's state law harassment and emotional distress claims as preempted by § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act)Discrimination/Retaliation*Mitchell v. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 10:28 pm
Preemption v. [read post]
25 Oct 2021, 8:12 am
MGFB Properties, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 7:27 am
State v. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 9:01 pm
For example, under the doctrine set forth in the 1979 case of United States v. [read post]
22 Oct 2019, 3:49 am
” It contended that CIELA thus “provoke[s] consumers to associate the registered mark with ‘cielo’ and the beauty and purety [sic] of [Montana] the Big Sky State,” where Registrant is located. [read post]
23 Oct 2024, 3:46 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
17 Oct 2010, 6:36 pm
Caliber Automotive Liquidators, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Mar 2020, 3:47 am
Readers might for instance recall the recent judgment in Sekmadienis Ltd v Lithuania [Katpost here], in which the ECtHR considered that a prohibition to use in advertising the image of Jesus and Mary on grounds of public morals should be regarded as an undue compression of the applicants' own freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR. [read post]
1 May 2013, 2:05 am
In United States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2013, 5:33 am
Image via CrunchBaseTrial is slated for April 22 in Timelines, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 1:22 am
Swatch, S.A. v. [read post]
15 Sep 2021, 1:59 am
The ultimate test however is, as stated by the court in Cowbell, whether, on comparison of the two marks, there is a likelihood of confusion”. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 4:54 am
Nola Spice Designs, LLC v. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 9:01 pm
Iancu v. [read post]
11 Oct 2015, 2:37 pm
In Case C-228/03 Gillette Co v LA-Laboratories Ltd Oy, the CJEU stated that use that does not create an impression of commercial connection or take unfair advantage of the earlier mark’s distinctive character or repute will be considered honest practice. [read post]
