Search for: "Strauss v. Strauss"
Results 541 - 560
of 618
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Dec 2014, 1:00 pm
Matteoni, Matteoni O’Laughlin & Hechtman, San Jose, California, Edward V. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 2:35 am
Catching up on their emails, the IPKat and Merpel have just discovered news of yet another juicy trade mark dispute which the German Bundesgerichtshof has decided to refer to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU): it's Case C-12/12, better known to people who can't even remember easy case numbers as Colloseum Holding AG v Levi Strauss & Co. [read post]
5 Mar 2021, 6:03 am
Silk, Sabastian V. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 6:31 am
The Court found that Regulation 3 does not carry the force of law (see Weiss v. [read post]
27 Jul 2024, 6:00 am
”Trump v. [read post]
28 Aug 2022, 9:21 pm
Her innovative case study on the Microsoft v. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 9:28 pm
Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, L.L.P., 105 S.W.3d 244, 250 (Tex. [read post]
20 May 2011, 3:06 pm
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP, 504 F.3d 1262, 1267 (Fed. [read post]
9 Nov 2014, 6:46 pm
READ 462- 476· Peter Strauss, The Place of Agencies in Government: Separation of Powers and the Fourth Branch, 84 Colum.L.Rev. 573 (1984) READ INTRO and PART I__________Mistretta v. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 3:59 am
The Supreme Court a few weeks ago agreed to review the Second Circuit’s decision in ABC v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 2:00 am
For example, in Brandt v Brandt (1997) FLC 92-758 the Full Court said this (at 84,343):This mathematical adjustment suffers from the same defect as that mentioned above. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 3:35 am
The 9th Circuit's recent decision in Levi Strauss & Co. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2023, 8:00 am
Until relatively recently, Article V and the hurdles it presented to formal constitutional amendment was seen as a feature rather than a bug, especially if one credited the constitutional theories of esteemed scholars like David Strauss or Bruce Ackerman. [read post]
3 Jun 2020, 7:42 am
Circuit case, on behalf of Professors Walter Dellinger, Bill Eskridge and David Strauss, arguing that the House lacks standing to sue on such an Appropriations Clause claim. [read post]
22 Aug 2012, 7:46 am
Jury - http://bit.ly/SParA8 (Dan Levine) Apple v. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 7:18 am
The high court in in 2012 dismissed as “improvidently granted review” First American v. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 3:00 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
12 Apr 2013, 7:32 am
This is “differentiation v integration”. [read post]
2 May 2015, 6:22 am
The case, Spokeo v. [read post]
