Search for: "State v. Register" Results 3141 - 3160 of 13,695
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Nov 2010, 4:02 am
Because Mopex does not own the trade mark rights in the sign VELOSOLEX, the product is (outside the Unites States, more below) sold under the name of "Black n Roll".Mopex originally registered the domain name velosolex.com, but lost it to Magneti Marelli Motorpropulsion France S.A.S, which owned the trade mark rights in the sign at the time (WIPO, No. [read post]
24 Feb 2021, 12:38 am by CMS
It did not have a registered office or fixed place of business in the UK. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 6:38 am
| Yet another horse – The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd. [read post]
27 Feb 2008, 1:25 am
"As noted by IP Kat Jeremy,The European Court of Justice rejected the argument that a PDO enjoys protection only in the exact form in which it is registered. [read post]
4 Mar 2022, 9:18 am by Eric Goldman
’” The examining attorney at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) refused to register the proposed mark on the ground the phrase falsely suggests a connection with a person (here Donald Trump) in violation of Lanham Act Section 2(a), and also because this mark violates Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act. [read post]
28 May 2014, 8:48 am by WIMS
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions   <> Oklahoma v. [read post]
6 May 2014, 8:42 am by WIMS
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions   <> Monroe Energy, LLC v. [read post]
7 Sep 2018, 7:38 am by NBlack
(Notably, the holding in Jiles was contradicted by the conclusion reached in a subsequent United States Supreme Court decision, Carpenter v. [read post]
7 Sep 2018, 7:38 am by NBlack
(Notably, the holding in Jiles was contradicted by the conclusion reached in a subsequent United States Supreme Court decision, Carpenter v. [read post]
14 Jul 2023, 10:33 am by NARF
(Indian Child Welfare Act) Manuel Corralles, Jr., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. [read post]