Search for: "U.S. v. Mark R"
Results 521 - 540
of 3,641
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Sep 2009, 3:23 am
R. [read post]
7 May 2015, 5:51 pm
On May 5, 2015, in Kelly v. [read post]
21 Jul 2010, 3:58 pm
Supreme Court in Hamdan v. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 7:48 pm
Millennium Sports, S.L.U., 2015 U.S. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 2:29 am
R Schwartz and Virtual Dates, Inc., FA1007001333180 (Nat. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 7:51 am
(quotation marks, citations, and footnote omitted). [read post]
23 Jun 2006, 4:50 am
William R. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 9:06 am
Perhaps more importantly, as mentioned above, Bridgestone owns a federally registered trademark for restaurant and bar services, which according to the U.S. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 9:06 am
Perhaps more importantly, as mentioned above, Bridgestone owns a federally registered trademark for restaurant and bar services, which according to the U.S. [read post]
15 Nov 2013, 10:08 am
., doTERRA International, LLC, both of Orem, Utah (collectively, "doTERRA") and Kerry Dodds d/b/a Kerry Essentials of Indianapolis, Indiana ("Kerry") infringed SOLACE®, Trademark No. 4266473, which has been registered by the U.S. [read post]
21 Sep 2012, 6:25 am
On appeal, the Circuit Court found that the District Court’s decision was inconsistent with a Supreme Court Judgement in Qualitex Co. v Jacobson Products Co. 514 U.S. 159, 162 (1995) and that the previous court was incorrect because Louboutin’s red soles have the requisite "distinctiveness" to merit trade mark protection. [read post]
21 Sep 2012, 6:25 am
On appeal, the Circuit Court found that the District Court’s decision was inconsistent with a Supreme Court Judgement in Qualitex Co. v Jacobson Products Co. 514 U.S. 159, 162 (1995) and that the previous court was incorrect because Louboutin’s red soles have the requisite "distinctiveness" to merit trade mark protection. [read post]
4 May 2015, 6:04 am
See U.S. v. [read post]
31 May 2010, 9:15 pm
U.S. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 11:44 am
The U.S. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 8:36 am
A functional design that is useful, even if it is not an essential feature of a product, is not entitled to trade-dress protection, the U.S. [read post]
20 May 2020, 3:58 am
” At The Employment Law Group, R. [read post]
5 Sep 2015, 10:37 am
The U.S. [read post]
16 May 2012, 10:46 am
” (internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Polk Cnty. v. [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 6:28 am
U.S. v. [read post]
