Search for: "Maples v. Maples"
Results 361 - 380
of 431
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jun 2010, 3:58 am
Move carefully with “made in Canada” claims; use of the Canadian flag, maple leaf, Mounties—things you can get away with in the US won’t fly there. [read post]
3 May 2010, 10:35 pm
I must admit that I think the hockey part of this story is a bit silly (as a long suffering Toronto Maple Leaf fan, I just want some playoffs, or a high draft pick, or...). [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 6:00 am
v=vOBae_i5MIg http://www.youtube.com/watch? [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 4:45 pm
Versacold Corp. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 1:37 pm
Maple Ridge (District) (1992), 71 B.C.L.R. (2d) 68, 17 B.C.A.C. 172 (C.A.) at p. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 6:07 am
In Goodridge v Pfizer Canada Inc., 2010 ONSC 1095 (Feb. 18, 2010), the plaintiffs claimed injuries from off-label use of Neurontin and its generic version. [read post]
18 Feb 2010, 10:14 am
On the other hand, applying New York law in this instance, pursuant to the doctrine of primary assumption of risk, a participant "engaging in a sport or recreational activity... consents to those commonly appreciated risks which are inherent in and arise out of the nature of the sport generally and flow from such participation" (Morgan v State of New York, 90 NY2d 471, 484 [1997]; see Turcotte v Fell, 68 NY2d 432, 438-440 [1986]; Youmans v Maple Ski… [read post]
30 Jan 2010, 4:37 pm
The Hepatitis A Blog supplements Marler Clark's Web site www.about-hepatitis.com, a site that provides information about hepatitis A, the symptoms and risks of infection, hepatitis A testing/detection, and how to prevent the spread of the hepatitis A virus. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 9:24 pm
Co., 12 AD3d 1110; Acquista v New York Life Ins. [read post]
24 Nov 2009, 8:04 am
Joyner reports the 2nd Court of Appeals made a similar ruling in September in Connecticut v. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 7:21 am
John Clifford Moore, Attorney at Law, Maple Valley, Robert Craig Levin, Mitchell Lang & Smith, Seattle, for Respondent. [read post]
12 Nov 2009, 5:16 am
His most recent IP Opinions have involved the conflict between trade mark law and other rights: protected national emblems were at issue in the 'battle of the maple leaves' in Joined Cases Câ€'202/08 P and Câ€'208/08 P American Clothing Associates SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market and Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market v American Clothing Associates SA, while in Joined Cases T-225/06, T-255/06,… [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 4:37 am
., Compton, CA 90220 David V. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 2:18 pm
Maples v. [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 8:35 am
In his dissenting opinion, Justice O'Donnell first agrees with the majority and the State ex. rel Ohio Edison Co. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2009, 2:13 pm
In today’s case (Moskaleva v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:00 am
(Class 46) India Chennai IP Appellate Board: Well-known trademarks - consumer recollection is key: Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Jai ram (International Law Office) Bombay High Court rules on the infringement of copyright in drawings: Indiana Gratings Private Limited & Anr v Anand Udyog Fabricators Private Limited & Ors (Spicy IP) Is ‘science’ essential for creating patent lawyers: some ‘general’ thoughts (Spicy… [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:00 am
(Class 46) India Chennai IP Appellate Board: Well-known trademarks - consumer recollection is key: Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Jai ram (International Law Office) Bombay High Court rules on the infringement of copyright in drawings: Indiana Gratings Private Limited & Anr v Anand Udyog Fabricators Private Limited & Ors (Spicy IP) Is ‘science’ essential for creating patent lawyers: some ‘general’ thoughts (Spicy… [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 10:01 pm
In today’s case (Rizzolo v. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
