Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 2801 - 2820
of 4,765
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Nov 2022, 5:56 pm
District Judge Glenn T. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 1:17 pm
Tre Milano, LLC v. [read post]
20 Mar 2007, 7:11 am
Right: what cats would do if they only had opposable thumbs - clever visuals by imgag.com (click on image for full effect)* On the evidence and employing normal principles of patent claim construction, Smurfit couldn't show that LB's engagement mechanism and plug contained the features described in Claim 1 of the patent.The IPKat wishes that the tamper-evident seal was there to protect the consumer against deterioration of the quality of the wine, rather than… [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 4:35 pm
Critically endangered North Atlantic right whales will never recover if we don't protect them from vessel strikes. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 6:11 am
Unlike in the UK, under section 1114 of the Lanham Act US trade mark owners have to prove that the defendant's use of their mark confused consumers. [read post]
5 Feb 2012, 7:55 am
It was more likely that consumers were purchasing the paintings because of their allegiance to the team, not because the paintings were thought to be originated or affiliated with the University of Alabama (dare the AmeriKat cite Arsenal v Reed's "badge of allegiance" argument?) [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 4:30 am
Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83, 108 (1998)). [read post]
26 Dec 2019, 1:50 pm
As defendants note, the purpose of these laws is to protect children by drying up the market for images of their sexual abuse. [read post]
24 Feb 2008, 9:06 pm
A weekly (or thereabouts) collection of news about counterfeits, fakes, knockoffs, replicas, imitations, and the culture of copying in general around the globe: Knockoff Oscars: 2008 Plagiarius awards announcedNo touch of mink: TTAB rules that "Mink" is misdescriptive for synthetic shoesOne ring to rule them both: PA court rules c.z. engagement ring didn't invalidate prenupBrutta figura: Fakes, immigrant sweatshop labor cheapen "Made in Italy"… [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 9:05 am
In Philip Abi-Najm, et. al, v Concord Condominium, LLC, several condominium purchasers sued Concord under for breach of contract, breach of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) and for fraud in the inducement based upon flooring that Concord installed that was far from the quality stated in the purchase contract. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 5:11 am
Promissory estoppel: Barnes v. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 7:07 am
Nestle v Cadbury [2022] EWHC 1671 (Ch) (July 2022)You can’t trade mark a colour. [read post]
19 May 2016, 9:23 am
Consumer appliances aren’t covered w/any exemptions; that will be an additional class. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 1:02 pm
First up is Tilden v. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 1:12 pm
Genericism occurs when a protectable trademark like linoleum, escalator, or even videotape becomes so associated with a good or service in consumer minds that it stops serving as a source identifier. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 11:50 am
We didn't garner a single vote in American Home Products Corp. v. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 2:59 pm
Second, the provisions of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. [read post]
2 Sep 2016, 6:44 am
The workers brought a putative class action suit alleging violations of the AWPA, the Washington Consumer Protection Act (CPA), and Washington wage laws. [read post]
20 Nov 2018, 8:07 am
The case is Haynes-Garrett v. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 5:36 am
Consider the regulatory nature of a lot of consumer protection law—often administered by an agency. [read post]
