Search for: "State v. Mark T. Smith"
Results 561 - 580
of 988
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Mar 2014, 5:33 pm
Category: Infringement By: Eric Paul Smith, Contributor TitlePfizer Inc. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 7:21 pm
Yes, Nate Silver or Stephen Smith could be your office mates but chances are they’re not. [read post]
18 Mar 2014, 9:18 am
This post is from the non-Reed Smith side of the blog. [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 4:34 pm
Brown, Supreme Court, May 8, 2013 TakewayThis case marks the first instance in which a South Carolina appellate court has vacated an arbitration award pursuant to S.C. [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 4:34 pm
Brown, Supreme Court, May 8, 2013 TakewayThis case marks the first instance in which a South Carolina appellate court has vacated an arbitration award pursuant to S.C. [read post]
15 Mar 2014, 5:12 pm
In Smith v. [read post]
13 Mar 2014, 7:28 am
Remember the DC Circuit opinion in Aamer v. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 12:41 pm
Glaxo Smith Kline Healthcare, 2006 WL 952032 (N.D. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 10:14 am
Those odd cross-currents marked the argument in the case of Plumhoff v. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 6:03 am
Note: one lesson reinforced by this case is that comparative advertising can't be the basis of a successful trademark claim, whether in Smith v. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 6:00 am
We know from Guenther v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 8:16 am
Smith, Staff Counsel at Americans United for Life (Counsel of Record for Drury Development Corporation et al. in Sebelius v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 6:37 am
Reuter v. [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 5:25 pm
Provision was that owner of a mark protected in one state who knows of use in another state shall have the right to oppose use or registration on proof that the registrant had knowledge of the existence and continuous use of the mark in any contracting states. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 3:36 pm
Smith (1990). [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 6:22 am
Stock, supra (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 2:04 pm
” Smith v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 4:47 am
At Constitutional Law Prof Blog, Ruthann Robson looks at the Court’s 1979 decision in Smith v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 6:36 am
Moreover, with respect to that one of the two options a RFRA claim is virtually foreclosed by the Court’s unanimous 1982 decision in United States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 5:01 am
The decisionThe IPO’s decision focused on the words of section 3(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, which states that “trade marks which are devoid of any distinctive character” -- an absolute bar to registration that comes from Article 3(1)(b) of the Trade Mark Directive and is paralleled in Article 7(1)(b) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation.The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Case C-37/03 BioID v OHIM… [read post]
