Search for: "In re William F."
Results 481 - 500
of 1,549
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jul 2017, 2:52 pm
This argument backfired on Williams-Sonoma because the Registrant’s mark registered under the provision of Section 2(f) of the Lanham Act. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 6:29 am
In re Williams-Sonoma, Inc., Serial No. 86092589 (June 28, 2017) [not precedential]. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 2:45 am
., on July 14, 1913, his name was changed to Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr. after his mother re-married. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 9:01 pm
As one group of justices for whom Justice Alito wrote put the point (in a way the other group likely would accept too), “[i]f private speech could be passed off as government speech by simply affixing a government seal of approval, government could silence or muffle the expression of disfavored viewpoints” quite easily.In the Tam case, Justice Alito’s opinion (for himself and three others) said it is “far-fetched to suggest that the content of a registered trademark… [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 7:42 am
Family P’ship, LP (In re Eberts), 2014 Bankr. [read post]
1 Jul 2017, 7:24 pm
William E. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 6:15 am
Democrat Richard F. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 3:05 pm
Today, we had an article published in Minnesota Bench & Bar on the topic of hearsay. [read post]
26 May 2017, 8:05 am
It is anticipated that DHS Secretary John F. [read post]
23 May 2017, 2:34 pm
” In re U.S. for an Order for Prospective Cell Site Location Info. on a Certain Cellular Tel., 460 F. [read post]
15 May 2017, 6:56 am
Jacoby, you’re going to have a bottom X%. [read post]
12 May 2017, 6:21 am
Corporate Governance in the Trump Era: A Note of Caution Posted by William R. [read post]
4 May 2017, 2:47 pm
See Williams v. [read post]
4 May 2017, 11:09 am
This was not a Scalian speech arguing for originalism, but more in the spirit of William F. [read post]
26 Apr 2017, 5:48 am
We're down to the final two. [read post]
23 Apr 2017, 1:18 pm
However, the Plaintiff maintains that the duty that should be imposed is consistent with the public policy of the State of New York, which has established similar duties to third parties in other cases.If Plaintiff's argument is entertained, the Court would be forced to engage in a profound re-examination of negligence law that was addressed in Palsgraf v. [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 4:34 pm
., In re Vaeck, 947 F.2d 488, 495-96 (Fed. [read post]
6 Apr 2017, 8:00 am
See Williams v. [read post]
4 Apr 2017, 4:31 pm
We’re just happy it finally did. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 7:26 pm
” He did add that he does eat them if they’re cooked. [read post]
