Search for: "United States v. Mark" Results 4021 - 4040 of 10,422
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jul 2014, 5:12 am
’ Declaration of Mark Keenheel, attached to § 2255 Motion as Exhibit 2 at ¶ 2.U.S. v. [read post]
2 May 2018, 9:55 am by Ralf Michaels
But Frydman is taking the litigation to the United States. [read post]
10 Feb 2021, 5:01 am by David S. Rubenstein
United States—may have far-reaching implications for executive power, judicial power, federalism and administrative law. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 8:31 am
Moreover, to the extent that the insurers provided coverage to policyholders in the continental United States, their activities affected interstate commerce. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 1:39 am
DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Criminal Practice Cocaine, Crack Distribution Conspirator's Sentence Reduced to 240-Month Mandatory Minimum Term United States v. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 3:17 pm by CAFE
Code §192 - Refusal of witness to testify or produce papersUnited States v. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 3:17 pm by CAFE
Code §192 - Refusal of witness to testify or produce papersUnited States v. [read post]
4 Feb 2007, 8:36 am
Nino Franco Spumanti S.R.L., Cancellation No. 92043953 [Petition to cancel a registration for RUSTICO for wines and sparkling wines, on the ground of fraud, alleging that Respondent "has only ever used the mark on sparkling wines in the United States. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 11:40 pm by Eleonora Rosati
The IPKat is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend Alessandro Cerri regarding the US Supreme Court’s decision in the Jack Daniel’s v VIP IP dispute. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 8:42 am
Kenneth continued the "Trademarks and Designs" overlap by giving an explanation of trade dress and product configuration in the United States. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 2:37 am by gmlevine
“I make no comment whatsoever” (the Panel states) “on whether or not Respondent’s use of the Domain Name and Complainant’s WALMART marks on its website might otherwise be in violation of relevant United States state or federal trademark laws. [read post]