Search for: "Marks v. United States" Results 3901 - 3920 of 9,189
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Oct 2013, 4:26 pm by H. Scott Leviant
” Id. at 1533 (Kagan, J., dissenting); accord Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Affirmance, Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2006, 3:50 pm
In other Public Defender news, the 9th Circuit blog has a post entitled "Gonzales: DOJ agrees Ninth Circuit precedent on minor offenses is flawed" and that the Department of Justice has conceded that the Ninth Circuit should grant rehearing en banc to correct United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2008, 3:50 pm
Evans, Addressing Default Trends in Patent-Based Section 337 Proceedings in the United States International Trade Commission, 106 Mich. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 7:24 am by Glenn Reynolds
In fact, the very same attorney, Steve Rosenbaum, pressed a case against a defendant in United States v. [read post]
9 May 2014, 10:56 am
Best Chairs contends that Defendants may have used the BESTCHAIR and BEST CHAIR designations as a trade name in the United States approximately four years ago. [read post]
1 Jan 2016, 9:00 am by Dennis Crouch
Lee, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 15-326 I/P Engine, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 9:55 am by Jordan Zolliecoffer
The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Second Circuit’s inconsistent application of the fair use doctrine when it comes to copyrighted art. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 6:59 am by James Bickford
  Today, the Court hears argument in McComish v. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 9:32 am
United States Polo Ass'n, Inc., No. 06-3691 (2d Cir. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 5:21 pm by Jonathan Zasloff
  Moreover, at least the national business groups, as represented by the United States Chamber of Commerce, have decided to put ideology over the interested of their members and take a hard line right-wing line. [read post]
14 Aug 2019, 8:43 am by Dennis Crouch
Consent Order vs Exclusion Order:  At the ITC, Swagway had proposed a consent order that it “would not sell for importation, import, or sell after importation into the United States products sold under the SWAGWAY mark. [read post]