Search for: "United States v. AT&T, Inc." Results 4321 - 4340 of 7,952
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Sep 2011, 2:24 pm by Will Aitchison
RydbomExp., Inc., 2009 WL 3152136 *6 (E.D.Pa., September 30, 2009); Tidd v. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 2:27 pm
 More recently, in Fenty v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd (t/a Topshop)  [2013] EWHC 2310 (noted by the IPKat here), pop star Rihanna succeeded in her claim for passing off against retail giant Topshop, who used her image on a t-shirt without her permission. [read post]
26 Sep 2010, 10:08 pm by Marie Louise
(TTABlog) District Court N D Illinois: Competitition alone not enough for Sherman Act or tortious interference: OpticsPlanet v OpticSale (Chicago Intellectual Property Law Blog) US Trade Marks – Lawsuits and strategic steps Hard Rock Cafe – Why you don’t allow assignments of trademark license agreements: Hard Rock Cafe Int’l (USA), Inc. v. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 3:00 am by Beth Graham
  The United States District Court for the Northern District of California ordered the parties to mediation. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 3:53 pm
Varian (PATracer)   US Copyright The importance of registering copyright in the United States: Elsevier B.V. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 3:53 pm
Varian (PATracer)   US Copyright The importance of registering copyright in the United States: Elsevier B.V. v. [read post]
5 May 2013, 12:15 pm by Schachtman
Sanders argues that the Milward opinion is important because it highlights what he characterizes as a “rhetorical conflict that has been ongoing, often below the surface, since the United States Supreme Court’s 1993 opinion in Daubert v. [read post]
10 Jul 2011, 12:52 pm by lawmrh
 Indeed, according to Realty Trac, Inc., “Arizona registered the nation’s second highest state foreclosure rate for the second year in a row, with 5.73 percent of its housing units (one in 17) receiving at least one foreclosure filing in 2010. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 10:52 am by Greg Mersol
In any event, the court rejected this curious approach outright, finding that the EEOC didn’t even try to meet the standards of Daubert v. [read post]