Search for: "Marks v. State"
Results 4001 - 4020
of 19,308
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Mar 2016, 10:20 am
The consensus view is that obligations to transfer the ownership of a trade mark do not fall within the scope of the exclusive jurisdiction of Article 22(4) Brussels I (see also Case 288/82 - Duijnstee v Goderbauer). [read post]
22 Jan 2020, 10:18 am
Supreme Court oral argument in Espinoza v. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 5:00 am
In its absence, state law could impose legal duties that would conflict directly with federal regulatory mandates.Id. at 870-71 (citations and quotation marks omitted).These decisions were in turn applied to the FDCA by a unanimous court in Buckman Co. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2013, 10:22 pm
- Bernard Maister, Caspar van Woensel• Sport as a brand and its legal protection in South Africa - Owen Dean• Notes and updates• Comment on the Green Paper for post-school education and training - Shihaam Shaikh• Confusion and the bounds of trade mark monopolies: Foschini v Coetzee - Jeremy Speres• The panados and panadon’ts of trade mark registrations: recent developments regarding trademarks used in the pharmaceutical industry - Marius… [read post]
10 Aug 2018, 2:54 am
WHB Licensing, LP v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 2:57 am
" Snyder's Lance, Inc. and Princeton Vanguard, LLC v. [read post]
27 Oct 2013, 7:18 am
www.bublicklaw.com In the case of Bakes v. [read post]
15 Oct 2018, 4:05 am
(Mark Graber, Sanford Levinson, Mark Tushnet, eds., Oxford University Press, 2018 Forthcoming)).Marie T. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 12:42 am
Urban Outfitters Inc. et al (Case number 1:12-cv-00195).Professor Ewelukwa concluded by stating that there are several questions which Africans and Nigerians must ask viz: What are the IP needs and expectations of holders of traditional knowledge/cultural property? [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 6:42 am
The Ninth Circuit in Grupo Gigante held that a famous mark exception to the territoriality principle exists. [read post]
26 Aug 2013, 5:43 am
AC34519 - State v. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 11:55 am
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision yesterday (.pdf) in Stauffer v. [read post]
24 May 2023, 9:52 am
As trivial as these questions might appear, the answer can make or break your trade mark protection, as the recent General Court judgment in Wenz Kunststoff v EUIPO - Mouldpro (MOULDPRO) (case T-794/21) shows: Background On 6 June 2011, Wenz Kunststoff GmbH & Co. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 9:45 pm
For example, in Kraft Foods Holdings, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2017, 3:26 am
The UK Supreme Court answered this question in the affirmative earlier this week in its judgment in R v M & Ors [2017] UKSC 58.Issued in the context of an interlocutory appeal in criminal proceedings, this ruling concerned the proper construction of section 92(1) of the UK Trade Marks Act 1994. [read post]
11 Jul 2014, 1:56 am
KG v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt. [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 3:08 am
Next, the Board applied the four-part test articulated in University of Notre Dame du Lac v. [read post]
26 Sep 2017, 7:20 am
Every year, the first Monday in October marks the beginning of a new term. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 4:43 pm
There have been a few cases in California where litigants continue to hash out causes of action under state spam statutes (see Hypertouch v. [read post]
19 Dec 2018, 9:24 am
Mark Satta* Last month, Aaron and Melissa Klein, a couple who owned a bakery in Oregon, asked the Supreme Court to review a ruling from the Court of Appeals of the State of Oregon, which held that the Kleins had violated Oregon state law by discriminating based on sexual orientation when they refused to bake a custom cake for a same-sex wedding. [read post]
