Search for: "K v C"
Results 21 - 40
of 3,099
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jun 2011, 10:21 am
JURGENS n/k/a JOHANNEMANN v. [read post]
6 May 2016, 9:54 am
Davis CA, Ciampaglia GL, Aiello LM, Chung K, Conover MD, Ferrara E, Flammini A, Fox GC, Gao X, Gonçalves B, Grabowicz PA, Hong K, Hui P, McCaulay S, McKelvey K, Meiss MR, Patil S, Peli Kankanamalage C, Pentchev V, Qiu J, Ratkiewicz J, Rudnick A, Serrette B, Shiralkar P, Varol O, Weng L, Wu T, Younge AJ, Menczer F. (2016) OSoMe: The IUNI observatory on social media. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 6:46 am
(A/K/A Nick) Khan, Maroof Miyana, And Pranav V. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 5:48 pm
In Smith v. [read post]
17 Aug 2018, 9:20 am
Civil litigation — Order of default — Motion to vacate Michael Worsham, appellant, brought suit in the Circuit Court for Harford County against Brian MacGregor, appellee, and other persons who are no longer involved in this litigation, alleging violations of the federal and Maryland telephone consumer protection acts. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 5:39 pm
“[C]ompliance with Rule 201(k) is not required when, as in this case, a party has disregarded discovery orders issued by the circuit court. [read post]
25 Jun 2011, 10:30 am
JURGENS n/k/a JOHANNEMANN v. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 11:17 am
NIXON v. [read post]
21 Jan 2023, 7:24 am
Code § 414(v)(2)(C). [read post]
17 Feb 2021, 6:45 am
K. [read post]
16 Aug 2021, 11:20 pm
The case of Hale v. [read post]
16 Aug 2021, 11:20 pm
The case of Hale v. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm
Rather, “[c]ourts must decide the applicability of comment k case-by-case, and only after taking evidence related to the various factors. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:00 am
State v. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 12:52 pm
Law Lessons from TRACEY EMOLO (n/k/a TRACEY DEGROOT) V. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 8:08 am
As the CJEU’s case law proves, such requirement applies to any kind of trade mark which is indistinguishable from the appearance of the products, be it a three-dimensional trade mark [Procter & Gamble v OHIM, Joined Cases C-473/01 P and C-474/01 P; Mag Instrument v OHIM, Case C-136/02 P and Deutsche SiSi-Werke v OHIM, Case C-173/04 P), a figurative trade mark… [read post]
19 Dec 2007, 5:57 pm
” Reversing the Central District of California in the case of K and N Engineering, Inc. v. [read post]
3 May 2017, 4:19 am
Johnson a/k/a Sylvester Thompson v. [read post]
21 Jul 2015, 8:27 am
§271(e)(2)(C)(ii) superfluous, andstatutes are to be interpreted if possible to avoid render-ing any provision superfluous.Marx v. [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 8:22 am
K. v. [read post]
