Search for: "State v. Mark" Results 301 - 320 of 19,773
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Nov 2019, 1:26 am
As Hill J in Aldi Stores Ltd Partnership v Frito-Lay Trading Co GmbH [2001] FCA 1874, [30] stated: In most, if not all cases, the question whether there has been use as a trade mark will be determined by an objective examination of the use in the context in which it appears.His Honour, in considering whether consumers would perceive the name Delphine as a badge of origin, stated: … the context or setting in which consumers viewed the EDMs [electronic… [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 6:29 am by Lawrence Solum
CALL FOR PAPERS:  For a proposed symposium  to mark the 25th anniversary of the United States Supreme Court’s landmark opinion in Batson v. [read post]
14 May 2009, 3:05 am
The Federal Court of Appeal recently delivered its decision on the appeal in SC Prodal 94 SRL v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 4:55 pm by Andrew Hamm
This morning the Court heard oral argument in Obergefell v. [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 12:22 am
As to the combination between colour and shapes, the Court mentioned another similar case decided by the EU General Court with reference to the green square illustrated on the right (decision in Case T‑282/09, Fédération internationale des logis v. [read post]
2 Apr 2007, 10:04 am
EPA "recalls the previous high-water mark of diluted standing requirements, United States... [read post]
26 Sep 2022, 12:20 pm by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo
Rothschild, Case No. 1:22-cv-00384, related to trade mark infringement and the sale of NFTs of “MetaBirkins” -pending: motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint denied-; Nike, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 6:54 am
No, says the Dutch Court of Appeal in The Hague, although its reasoning is a little creative when it comes to its application of EU trade mark law.The decision is Zhu v Great Blue Sky Internationaland dates back to December 2013. [read post]
4 Jul 2007, 6:04 pm
Eleven months after ruling that taxing damage awards for nonphysical compensatory damages violated the United States Constitution, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has reversed itself in Murphy v. [read post]