Search for: "Marks v. State"
Results 2581 - 2600
of 19,799
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jun 2009, 10:17 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 1:29 pm
See State v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 9:00 am
The fabrication of counterfeit money, whether coin or paper, counterfeit titles or coupons of public debt, created by National, State, Provincial, Territorial, Local or Municipal Governments, bank notes or other instruments of public credit, counterfeit seals, stamps, dies and marks of State or public administrations, and the utterance, circulation or fraudulent use of the above mentioned objects. 15. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 7:43 am
The fabrication of counterfeit money, whether coin or paper, counterfeit titles or coupons of public debt, created by National, State, Provincial, Territorial, Local or Municipal Governments, bank notes or other instruments of public credit, counterfeit seals, stamps, dies and marks of State or public administrations, and the utterance, circulation or fraudulent use of the above mentioned objects. 15. [read post]
6 Apr 2024, 9:03 am
Iancu v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 2:51 am
Motorola, Inc. and TCL v. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 6:21 am
Nautica Apparel, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2024, 3:28 am
Instagram, LLC v. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 6:35 am
Board-Tech Electronic Co. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 7:25 am
* Oracle v Google: are certain elements of the Java platform entitled to copyright protection? [read post]
23 Aug 2009, 10:00 pm
DC Comics and Marvel Characters, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Apr 2015, 7:11 pm
Gallo Winery v. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 5:49 am
In a rare, contested concurrent use proceeding, the Board awarded junior user ABF concurrent use registrations for the three marks shown below, for hotel and motel services, in the entire United States except for the State of Arizona. [read post]
28 Nov 2019, 10:39 am
| Feilin v. [read post]
4 Apr 2024, 2:31 pm
Pennsylvania State University v. [read post]
7 Sep 2011, 5:59 am
In a decision widely considered the high-water mark of state-action doctrine, Shelley v. [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 2:43 pm
It is about a business that got a bunch of trade marks covering the somewhat unregistrable word "supreme", and then decided to bring proceedings against a defendant who wasn't using the word as a trade mark and whose use of it went back 20 years, recounts Jeremy.* The EPO: privileged and immune says the PresidentMerpel re-sinks her paws in the hot story of the decision that Hague Court of Appeal issued in the sadly famous proceedings in SUEPO v EPO [on… [read post]
23 May 2023, 4:57 am
This argument did not satisfy the Judge, however, who stated that it was those characteristics used in combination that are specific to the Lidl Marks. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 7:16 am
In a 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addressed this issue in Rescuecom Corp. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 8:04 am
In a 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addressed this issue in Rescuecom Corp. v. [read post]
