Search for: "E & S Express Inc. v. United States" Results 461 - 480 of 759
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Sep 2014, 4:55 am
This one is Chanel Inc. v Chanel’s Salon and Chanel Jones, 2:14-cv-00304, and sees fashion and cosmetics company Chanel as plaintiff. [read post]
9 Jan 2019, 2:48 pm by John Elwood
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 6:48 am by Sarah Erickson-Muschko
United States, a case involving the “anti-harboring” provision in Alabama’s 2011 immigration law, which made it a crime to help undocumented immigrants enter or live in the state. [read post]
5 Jul 2008, 11:05 am
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 4:22 am by Emma Snell
The explosions inside the building hosting Transnistria’s state security ministry in Tiraspol were caused by a rocket-propelled grenade attack, the region’s authorities said. [read post]
2 May 2008, 7:00 am
: (Afro-IP), UN agency to address link between IP assets and financial securities: (Intellectual Property Watch), &;lsquo;Free’ culture: it’s not what ‘we in the west’ might imagine: (IPcentral.info), What’s your intellectual property strategy? [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 1:13 pm by John Elwood
  Although BMW of North America, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:02 pm by renholding
I dissent from the Commission’s denial of a petition to amend Rule 202.5(e), our so-called gag rule.[1]  This de facto rule follows from the Commission’s enforcement of its policy, adopted in 1972, that it will not “permit a defendant or respondent to consent to a judgment or order that imposes a sanction while denying the allegations in the complaint or order for proceedings. [read post]
10 May 2010, 3:55 am
(Copyright Litigation Blog)   US Trade Marks – Decisions Patent minefield now a risk for trademark owners - District Court E D Missouri applies MedImmune in Express Scripts Inc v Intel Corp. [read post]
7 Sep 2022, 5:23 am by Eugene Volokh
The Supreme Court has in practice been unwilling to extend the principle beyond the facts of Healy and Brown-Forman, which involved laws that by "express terms" or "inevitable effect" regulate out-of-state commerce.[22] Some contend that the extraterritoriality cases are best read to invalidate only state laws that "discriminat[e] against out-of-state rivals or consumers"—that is, extraterritoriality must be understood… [read post]