Search for: "Marks v. State "
Results 2941 - 2960
of 21,684
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Aug 2018, 1:16 am
The court considers that, as discussed in the TOP Logistics case "…any act by a third party preventing the proprietor of a registered trade mark in one or more Member States from exercising his right to control the first placing of goods bearing that mark on the market in the EEA, by its very nature undermines that essential function of the trade mark" (emphasis added). [read post]
7 Aug 2018, 1:16 am
The court considers that, as discussed in the TOP Logistics case "…any act by a third party preventing the proprietor of a registered trade mark in one or more Member States from exercising his right to control the first placing of goods bearing that mark on the market in the EEA, by its very nature undermines that essential function of the trade mark" (emphasis added). [read post]
1 May 2024, 3:31 am
As the Board of Appeal had correctly stated, "the loss of reputation rarely happens as a single occurrence but is rather a continuing process over a long period of time, as the reputation is usually built up over a period of years and cannot simply be switched on and off [...] in addition, such drastic loss of reputation for a short period of time would be up to the applicant to prove". [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 6:15 am
Editor's Note: The following post comes to us from Mark A. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 1:51 pm
Yesterday the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in American Humanist Association v. [read post]
12 Aug 2021, 4:00 am
The Appellate Division stated that it had consistently recognized that "the Board may adopt reasonable rules consistent with and supplemental to the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law, and the Chair of the Board may make reasonable regulations consistent with the provisions thereof" (Matter of Randell v Christie's Inc., 183 AD3d 1057, 1059 [2020] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted].Those regulations require, in relevant part, that… [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 2:47 pm
Butkevych, The International-Legal Ideology of Pre-Slavic Chiefdoms of the Ukrainian Ethnos (Part Four) Mark Somos, Boston in the State of Nature, 1761-1765: The Birth of an American Constitutional Trope Christopher Rossi, The Gulf of Fonseca and International Law: Condominium or Anti-Colonial Imperialism? [read post]
12 Aug 2021, 4:00 am
The Appellate Division stated that it had consistently recognized that "the Board may adopt reasonable rules consistent with and supplemental to the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law, and the Chair of the Board may make reasonable regulations consistent with the provisions thereof" (Matter of Randell v Christie's Inc., 183 AD3d 1057, 1059 [2020] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted].Those regulations require, in relevant part, that… [read post]
4 May 2019, 6:15 am
| Can the god of wealth be registered as a trade mark, and why? [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 2:59 pm
They're not very good at policing their own, Mark Bennett's on-point blog screeds notwithstanding. [read post]
15 Jan 2011, 9:34 pm
Copyright © 2010 Mark Bennett. [read post]
24 Jul 2024, 9:48 am
The second part of the judgment then focused on whether such violation was justified by the unique qualities of the property in question, the peculiarities of its discovery, or the Italian State’s interest in preserving the integrity of its cultural patrimony. [read post]
22 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
” Mark Sherman reports at AP that “the accuracy of the once-a-decade population count is at the heart” of the case,” Department of Commerce v. [read post]
21 Jan 2009, 2:02 pm
Mark your calendars for Thursday, February 12, 2009. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 5:05 am
This should be the subject of national, not local, policy — a decision for Congress, not state legislatures. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 2:51 pm
A round of earlier petitions, filed before a federal appeals court created a circuit split, missed the mark. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 11:35 pm
A product is falsely marked if it identifies a patent ostensibly covering the product where (i) no such patent exists; (ii) the patent is expired; or (iii) the patent listed does not cover the product.Now the CAFC has ruled in Pequignot v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V. [read post]
23 Jan 2009, 4:00 am
Hearst Communications, Inc. v. [read post]
