Search for: "Santana v. Santana"
Results 321 - 340
of 365
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Sep 2009, 8:01 pm
See Hicks v. [read post]
25 Aug 2009, 1:01 am
According to a news report in The Press Enterprise, Michael V. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 10:44 am
(Bradford, MA; Jose Santana, President) Amaral Carpentry, Inc. [read post]
19 Jul 2009, 8:17 am
Santana, No. 08-1533 (1st Cir. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 10:45 pm
Precedential No. 13: TTAB Axes Fender Guitar Shapes, Finding Them Generic or Lacking Acquired DistinctivenessOwnership:Pam Chestek Ponders the Transfer of Common Law Trademarks under State LawTTAB Affirms Rejection of SOU filed by Assignor After AssignmentTTAB Resolves Santana's Ownership Dispute, But Pamela Chestek is DissatisfiedTTAB Finds No Trademark Rights in OEM Who Applied "WASTEMAID" Mark at Others' DirectionPriority:Precedential No. 16: TTAB Throws New England… [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 9:49 pm
" I was reading a recent case — Santana v. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 9:05 am
Santana-Gonzalez v. [read post]
20 May 2009, 2:36 am
See United States v. [read post]
19 May 2009, 7:12 am
Pamela Chestek likes nothing more than a tangled trademark ownership dispute, particularly when it's an inter-family brouhaha, but she did not appreciate the TTAB's decision in Arturo Santana Gallego v. [read post]
17 May 2009, 8:14 am
State v. [read post]
19 Mar 2009, 7:59 pm
Kortum-Managhan v. [read post]
3 Feb 2009, 7:15 am
Santana, 6 F.3d 1, 11 (1st Cir. 1993). [read post]
1 Feb 2009, 11:00 pm
Regional Acceptance Corporation, Oppositions Nos. 91155299 and 91155302 [Section 2(d) oppositions to the mark REGIONAL in standard character and design form, for "financial services, namely, consumer and installment loans," based on Opposer's registered mark REGIONS for banking services.]February 4, 2009 - 2 PM: Arturo Santana Gallego v. [read post]
22 Jan 2009, 9:00 am
In Santana v. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 12:03 pm
State v. [read post]
18 Oct 2008, 5:13 pm
Santana v. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 8:17 pm
In People v Santana (2008 NY Slip Op 07377 [4th Dept 10/308]), the Court held that there was no error in permitting the attorney for a jailhouse informant to testify that pursuant to to the his cooperation agreement, the informant was required "to provide truthful cooperation" at defendant's trial in order to receive a downward departure of his federal sentence. [read post]
14 Aug 2008, 11:37 am
Santana-Aguirre, 2008 U.S. [read post]
13 Aug 2008, 6:03 am
And again from Mike at C&F (who is just posting one great thing after another), the 8th Circuit decision in U.S. v. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 10:13 pm
In United States v. [read post]
