Search for: "Leathers v. Leathers"
Results 41 - 60
of 542
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Mar 2022, 10:36 am
The final design added a higher heel and varied the design of the leather/suede strips. [read post]
27 Feb 2022, 8:45 pm
v=o0OIfdlwZHwVideo Credit: Sean Evans, @evvo1991https://www.backtothemovies.com/ [read post]
5 Feb 2022, 5:53 am
"She’d also broken out a pair of knee-high leather boots with heels like stilts. [read post]
4 Feb 2022, 8:19 am
Ten days after Billing was decided, the Court decided Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2022, 11:30 pm
AFL-CIO v. [read post]
5 Jan 2022, 9:56 am
The case of the day is Porsche Motorsport North America, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 4:10 am
The days of Griggs v. [read post]
2 Jan 2022, 6:29 am
” FOURNIE v. [read post]
11 Dec 2021, 11:53 am
Capitol Leather, LLC, 88 Va. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 5:03 am
Certain state antitrust schemes, for example, continue to treat resale price maintenance (RPM) as per se illegal (see, for example, here), a position inconsistent with the federal consumer welfare-centric rule of reason approach (see Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2021, 5:15 am
Bayer Consumer Care AG, No. 21-195 (impact of foreign use on trademark rights in the US); Australian Leather Pty. [read post]
13 Sep 2021, 9:46 am
Other factors may also be considered, such as the distribution channels of the goods concerned (Caventa v OHIM, T‑224/11).In the present case, the goods were neither of the same nature nor the same purpose, nor were they of the same type nor intended for the same purpose or for the same use. [read post]
28 Jul 2021, 7:12 am
Steven V. [read post]
10 Jun 2021, 12:25 pm
The actual or potential use of registered marks in another form is irrelevant when comparing the signs [para. 25] (emphasis added).This is consistent with paragraph 34 of Mitrakos v EUIPO – Belasco Baquedano (YAMAS), which refers to paragraph 38 of Pico Food v OHIM — Sobieraj (MILANÓWEK CREAM FUDGE). [read post]
3 May 2021, 9:40 am
S. 214 (1944)); Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2021, 3:28 am
Stuart Spector Designs, Ltd. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2021, 9:40 am
Supreme Court issued numerous landmark decisions in 2020, among those—for trademark scholars and practitioners—Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2021, 3:42 am
Mr Hobbs traces this proposition back through various cases to Leather Cloth Co. v American Leather Cloth Co. (1865) H.L.C. 523.Scandecor Developments AB v Scandecor Marketing AB [2001] UKHL 21 takes us through the changes that have taken place over time to the way trade is conducted and hence the changing conditions that have been applied to the sale of trade marks. [read post]
10 Feb 2021, 12:40 am
When you get down to the nitty gritty, for Kyo, 3 outfits used in the clip would prove that Aya had used his work and that that use would constitute unfair use of the economic value of his moodboard : √ use of a white dress inspired by the same esthetical atmosphere (sitting behind a desk): the Court disagreed, Aya used a fine white dress with a V-neckline different to the thick white, buttoned-up outfit with lavalliere collared blouse proposed by Kyo; √ use of a yellow dress:… [read post]
30 Jan 2021, 8:24 am
From Miyoko's Kitchen v. [read post]
