Search for: "MAY v. US "
Results 4061 - 4080
of 120,358
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Mar 2011, 7:43 am
At least most of us would. [read post]
10 Nov 2012, 3:44 pm
This past week the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Michigan v. [read post]
15 Dec 2015, 8:53 am
In the recent case of Symonds v. [read post]
25 Nov 2012, 7:51 am
Tucows.com Co., D2008-0272 (WIPO May 6, 2008); Markel Corporation. v. [read post]
22 May 2009, 7:52 am
Although that difference may not always be apparent, in some areas, whether or not to have legislation focusing on bullying behavior in the workplace, for example, the difference is significant, It at least partly explains why such legislation is much more readily received in jurisdictions outside the U.S. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 5:00 am
Let us not allow Prop. 64 creep to redefine the elements of certification in California. [read post]
10 Oct 2018, 6:57 am
Under the new rule, the PTAB will now rely upon the PHOSITA standard more traditionally used for issued patents as articulated by in Phillips v. [read post]
12 Jun 2020, 2:30 pm
(And I'm pleased to see the Court use that exact word at the hearing as well.)The Court of Appeal -- quite understandably -- affirms. [read post]
26 Oct 2021, 12:54 pm
The DMCA says the subpoenaed information may be used only for copyright enforcement purposes, but there’s no practical way to enforce this, and I can’t think of anyone who has tried. [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 10:55 am
In Brown v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 7:36 am
In Willemsen v. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 12:03 pm
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 10:00 am
The Rosetta Stone case also involves nominative fair use issues, similar to the 2nd Circuit case Tiffany (NJ) Inc. v. eBay Inc., 600 F.3d 93, (2d Cir. 2010), where the 2nd Circuit held that a defendant “may lawfully use a plaintiff's trademark where doing so is necessary to describe the plaintiff’s product and does not imply a false affiliation or endorsement by the plaintiff of the defendant. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 10:07 pm
Midwest Online Resale of Expired Cosmetics May Be Trademark Infringement--Mary Kay v. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 6:20 am
Following an appeal heard on 5 May 2016, the Supreme Court handed down judgment on 13 July in the case of Edwards v Kumarasamy. [read post]
4 May 2012, 6:28 am
See Kirby v. [read post]
26 Nov 2007, 3:41 am
The first use of "tase" as a verb in a judicial opinion on Lexis is Maiorano v. [read post]
30 May 2008, 3:34 am
In Cedar Lake Conference Association v. [read post]
16 Mar 2021, 5:27 pm
A claim is not ripe if it turns on “contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all. [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:35 pm
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, May 07, 2008 US v. [read post]
