Search for: "Taylor v. Bell" Results 41 - 60 of 96
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jun 2008, 3:41 pm
Of those nine petitions, the government recommended the Court grant plenary review in four cases: Pacific Bell v. linkLine Communications (07-512), an anti-trust case; AT&T v. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 1:42 am
 Never too late 35 [week ending Sunday 1 March] – EPO v SUEPO | Supreme Petfoods Ltd v Henry Bell & Co (Grantham) Ltd | UK IPO on EPO | Scents and copyright | GIs under scrutiny | UPC test-drive | Is UK failing to protect innovation? [read post]
23 Apr 2017, 1:18 pm
(See Affidavit of Taylor Cratsley, dated November 21, 2016). [read post]
24 Jun 2018, 4:41 pm by INFORRM
The article considers the alleged influence of Bell on the decisions and considers the implications of such an approach by the media outlet. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 1:03 pm by John Elwood
Bell, 10-8629, is one of this week’s hardest-to-read cases. [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]
31 Oct 2022, 4:00 am by jonathanturley
Forty-four years have brought many changes, while other things have remained surprisingly the same: Bell-bottoms are back, James Taylor is still singing, the Chicago Bears are yet again working on a rebuild — and, yes, we are still debating race-based admissions criteria. [read post]