Search for: "STATE v CASTLE" Results 221 - 240 of 799
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2021, 11:38 am by Eleonora Rosati
The IPKat is pleased to host the following analysis by Vincenzo Vinciguerra (Weblegal and Cattolica University) on the recent design decision of the General Court in Lego, T-515/19.Here's what Vincenzo writes:The Lego Case T-515/19: A building block castle built up on sandby Vincenzo VinciguerraIn Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of… [read post]
5 Jul 2009, 3:35 am
Subsequently the parties disagreed for a period of time over whether the meals met the proper standards for kosher food.In Castle v. [read post]
3 Nov 2017, 11:24 am by Ben
They might do as the James Castle Collection and Archive (which has the largest privately held collection of Castle’s works) is suing Say and his publisher for copyright infringement in Boise federal court, alleging that many of Say’s illustrations “are intended to evoke and imitate the artistic style of James Castle but some two dozen of the illustrations “are far more than a tribute” and are “similar if not virtually identical… [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 7:30 am
Practice Tip: The United States Supreme Court addressed the elements required for trade dress to be protected in Two Pesos, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2018, 5:58 am
The Advocate General upheld the General Court’s decision that the State of Bavaria’s EUTM “Neuschwanstein”, a German fairy tale castle and popular tourist attraction, is not descriptive of the goods and services covered by the mark and not therefore not invalid. [read post]
2 Apr 2013, 7:49 am by WSLL
Castle of Davis and Cannon, LLP, Sheridan, Wyoming. [read post]
22 May 2015, 4:00 am by INFORRM
The defendant relied on the judgment of Lord Dyson in the Supreme Court case of R (Lumba) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ([2012] 1 AC 245 [101]), in which he disapproved the concept of “vindicatory damages”. [read post]