Search for: "Coca v. State"
Results 241 - 260
of 532
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jul 2014, 9:00 am
Recently, a Louisiana state court carefully examined the terms of a non-compete in Gulf Industries, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2014, 8:28 pm
Metzler v. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 7:40 am
National Australia Bank (OT09), United States v. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 12:40 pm
Coca-Cola Co. [read post]
1 Jul 2014, 2:27 pm
Case citation: Pom Wonderful LLC v. [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 7:28 pm
Consider one recent example: by a vote of eight to zero, the Justices reversed the Ninth Circuit decision in POM Wonderful LLC v. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 10:56 am
Coca-Cola resists this canon and its high standard. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 12:39 am
Coca Cola Company. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 10:17 am
The lower court ruled that the FDCA – a federal law that gives the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) the authority to ensure the safety of a variety of goods, including beverages – precluded POM’s Lanham Act claims concerning the labeling and naming of the Coca-Cola beverage. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 6:09 am
In their landmark 2008 case, District of Columbia v. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 2:09 am
The case is Case C-97/12 P Louis Vuitton Malletier v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Friis Group International ApS intervening, a ruling of the Eighth Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of 15 May. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 1:50 pm
Pom competes in the pomegranate juice market with The Coca-Cola Company (“Coca-Cola”) Minute Maid® products. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 5:24 am
Coca Cola, involving standing and preclusion, respectively. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 4:57 am
Last Thursday’s ruling in POM Wonderful v. [read post]
14 Jun 2014, 4:00 pm
But last Thursday, when the Court decided Pom Wonderful LLC v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 2:22 pm
” Just last year, in City of Arlington v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 12:35 pm
POM Wonderful LLC v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 7:31 am
Lanham Act (a very interesting decision that I finally got around to reading this morning – see: POM Wonderful LLC v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 7:08 am
Coca-Cola Co.); increasing ongoing debate about whether photo-shopped advertising should be banned or regulated in the United States; and then this morning what I thought was a very interesting comment on a potential lawsuit by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (“CSPI”) against Campbell Soup Company for alleged false marketing claims for its V8 Splash and V8 V-Fusion Refresher drinks (see: here). [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 4:16 am
In Clark v. [read post]
