Search for: "Marks v. Cross"
Results 241 - 260
of 2,840
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jan 2013, 4:49 am
ChaCha Search, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2021, 3:39 am
Jason Green v. [read post]
18 Aug 2010, 8:59 pm
A cross by the side of a public highway marking, for instance, the place where a state trooper perished need not be taken as a statement of governmental support for sectarian beliefs. [read post]
16 Feb 2007, 12:56 am
The IPKat has recently spotted Target Fixings Ltd v Brutt Beteiligungsgesellschaft and others, a UK trade marks decision of Appointed Person Richard Arnold QC, Case O-372-06 from 20 December 2006. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 11:00 am
Sierra Sunrise Vineyards v. [read post]
25 Jul 2019, 5:41 am
This resulted in increased reliance on smugglers, driving up the cost of crossing the border, which probably depressed immigration. [read post]
23 May 2013, 7:21 am
Talbot that he was not crossing the street at a crosswalk, marked or unmarked, at the time he struck or was struck by Ms. [read post]
23 May 2013, 7:21 am
Talbot that he was not crossing the street at a crosswalk, marked or unmarked, at the time he struck or was struck by Ms. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 1:25 pm
Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
8 Nov 2020, 9:37 am
V. involving an infringement claim of Eli Lily’s pemetrexed patents. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 3:46 am
Corp. v. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 3:20 am
Quirk, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Dec 2020, 11:47 am
Grazette v. [read post]
17 Feb 2021, 4:23 am
" [That pronunciation never crossed my mind. [read post]
31 Oct 2022, 4:58 am
Grace v. [read post]
25 Mar 2022, 7:24 am
Carr v. [read post]
23 Jul 2020, 4:27 pm
Ms Henriques was cross-examined by Ms Laws QC. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 3:30 am
The Board noted that the existing registration issued prior to Wal-Mart v. [read post]
17 Feb 2018, 2:54 am
Likewise in the High Court, the Claimant wished to rely on them in the High Court in relation to their case on distinctiveness (and not as evidence of confusion).It is clear from Interflora 1 (Interflora v Marks and Spencer [2012] EWCA Civ 1501) and Interflora 2 (Interflora v Marks and Spencer [2013] EWCA Civ 319) that surveys should only be permitted if they are of "real value". [read post]
6 Jun 2022, 5:32 am
Tiger Lily Ventures Ltd. v. [read post]
