Search for: "Lanham v. Lanham"
Results 341 - 360
of 4,397
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Dec 2014, 4:12 am
DR Distributors, LLC v. 21 Century Smoking, Inc., No. 12 C 50324, Slip Op. [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 10:51 am
The case is David Couture v Playdom (Fed. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 12:39 am
You might recall that the Court addressed Lanham Act standing earlier this term in Lexmark International, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 11:58 am
Intellectual Property Trademark infringement; standing Before a plaintiff may assert a claim under the Lanham Act, she must have a commercial interest to protect. [read post]
24 Dec 2010, 7:13 am
TriState HVAC Equipment, LLP v. [read post]
6 Nov 2019, 8:18 am
Boltex Manufacturing Co. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 8:55 am
Eric Goldman points to Nemet Chevrolet Ltd. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2024, 9:07 am
Corp. v. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 7:45 am
In 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 1:00 pm
" Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has declined to review a lower court decision (pdf download) in Pro Football, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 4:03 pm
” The the ‘disparagement’ and ‘immoral/scandalous’ clauses of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act have already been found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Brunetti and Matal v. [read post]
20 Mar 2019, 12:28 pm
Tang v. [read post]
19 May 2023, 8:40 am
Delta T LLC v. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 9:59 am
The case, Reckitt Benckiser Inc. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 6:21 am
Gates Corp. v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 10:45 am
See Network Automation, Inc. v. [read post]
11 May 2022, 8:33 am
Thus, the judgment was reversed to the extent that it decided to award profits and the case remanded fort a new trial on that issue (Harbor Breeze Corp. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2008, 6:11 pm
., Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jul 2018, 4:09 am
The defendant was not a prevailing party entitled to attorney fees under the Lanham Act because there was no court action that materially altered the legal relationship between the parties. [read post]
31 Mar 2016, 1:18 pm
The CAFC in Romag v. [read post]