Search for: "Box v. State"
Results 3501 - 3520
of 4,730
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Apr 2020, 1:31 pm
United States got his students to the line at 3:30 a.m., behind only four other people. [read post]
26 May 2011, 10:58 pm
ePlus v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 12:15 am
In particular he stated that 'there was no suggestion from either party that the Shanks patents were crucial to Unilever’s success. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 6:43 am
It would appear to tick none of the boxes, and fail the distinctiveness test.Marks which are not inherently distinctive may nevertheless acquire distinctiveness through use (see the HAVE A BREAK caseas an example). [read post]
5 Jul 2009, 2:23 pm
Everything is Bigger in Texas The court rooms of eastern Texas would not, as many may assume, have tumbleweeds blowing through the jury box. [read post]
26 May 2010, 4:56 am
U.S. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2011, 4:24 pm
United States v. [read post]
14 Mar 2012, 4:13 pm
In the classic case of Loretto v. [read post]
1 Oct 2015, 7:01 am
See especially Box 14.3. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 3:33 am
See LNC Invs., Inc. v. [read post]
3 Sep 2018, 9:30 pm
Dissenting in Mingo Logan Coal v. [read post]
14 Sep 2021, 8:24 am
In a watershed decision in Gideon v. [read post]
21 May 2025, 9:00 am
”[5] Thus, Thaler had effectively boxed himself out of claiming authorship by stating that he had nothing to do with the creation of the work. [read post]
15 Jul 2020, 2:55 am
Increasingly, however, the state is struggling. [read post]
14 May 2020, 12:09 pm
See U.S. v. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 11:23 am
Karo and United States v. [read post]
13 Feb 2025, 6:30 am
Indeed, its Ur-text, Footnote 4 of United States v. [read post]
4 Jul 2010, 6:02 pm
(Public Knowledge) Michael Geist presentation: ACTA – The state of play (Michael Geist) Australia I thought cats were colour blind… Federal Court confirms Mars has exclusive right to use colour ‘Whiskas purple’ for cat food: Mars Australia Pty Ltd (formerly Effem Foods Pty Ltd) v Société des Produits Nestlé SA (Australian Trade Marks Law Blog) FCAFC: On appeal, simulated flames from direct light found infringing: Bitech… [read post]
26 Sep 2023, 5:55 am
(The Doe v. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 6:33 am
to pay 23% ongoing royalty for future infringement: Creative Internet Advertising Corp. v. [read post]
