Search for: "Marks v. State "
Results 4981 - 5000
of 21,686
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Mar 2014, 11:21 am
As quick off the mark as usual, Justice Scalia’s unanimous opinion for the Court in Law v. [read post]
23 Jun 2008, 10:43 am
Via SCOTUSBlog, the US Supreme Court today issued its ruling in Rothgery v. [read post]
20 Oct 2009, 10:06 pm
If the mark has been in use for a while you may even be able to get the Examining Attorney to accept a simple declaration stating how long the mark has been in use. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 7:14 pm
” The case cite is Invision Production & Media Services, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2009, 4:31 am
Kovach v. [read post]
22 Jul 2021, 12:56 pm
” Id. at 731, 732 (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 3:55 pm
Br. at 8 (citing State v. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 3:55 pm
Br. at 8 (citing State v. [read post]
23 Aug 2007, 3:01 am
In Eslava v. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 7:08 am
Supreme Court in Wyeth v. [read post]
25 Oct 2014, 10:55 am
United States—the first since the D.C. [read post]
20 Jan 2024, 6:05 am
Here is a case from the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. [read post]
27 May 2011, 1:01 pm
I posted earlier this spring on the Seventh Circuit’s decision in United States v. [read post]
31 Jul 2016, 9:05 pm
So why are California and other states muscling their way into provision of private pensions? [read post]
22 Apr 2007, 12:15 pm
The Verdict Form in United States v. [read post]
26 Feb 2021, 3:18 am
Inc., 172 AD3d 1486, 1486 [2019] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 2:00 pm
In Sweetgreen v. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 5:01 am
This might explain why one of the cases the motion cites, State v. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 4:09 am
., Inv. v. [read post]
24 Feb 2007, 11:55 am
It argued that its registered mark should be considered as a whole, stating: SPAM and SPAM ARREST are not seen as essentially the same. [read post]
