Search for: "Does 1-35" Results 6021 - 6040 of 9,560
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jun 2008, 1:34 pm
Out of curiosity, I researched "Batman" trademarks on TESS and found registered word marks for: (1) entertainment in the nature of live stunt shows, and entertainment in the nature of amusement park rides, (2) breakfast cereal, (3) entertainment services-namely, television and animated cartoon programs and (4) Comic Magazines . . . among about 35 other various types. [read post]
14 Feb 2009, 2:58 am
See In re GPAC, 57 F.3d 1573, 1580, 35 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1116, 1122 (Fed. [read post]
24 Oct 2008, 8:29 pm
” [47]           While the judgment of the Court of Appeal in that case was set aside and a new trial ordered [[1952] 1 D.L.R. 82] there is nothing said in the judgments delivered in this Court to throw any doubt on the accuracy of the statement quoted. [read post]
10 Sep 2015, 3:51 pm by Michele Berger
A DQP may be a director, officer, substantial contributor, family members, or a 35% controlled entity. [read post]
8 Jan 2010, 2:31 am by John L. Welch
CUSTOMS Logo Barred by Sections 2(a) and 2(b)Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion:Precedential No. 46: TTAB Finds Two "ANTHONY'S" Marks Confusingly Similar for Pizza RestaurantsPrecedential No. 44: TTAB Decides "CAB CALLOWAY" Priority Dispute, Rules that Personal Names Are Inherently DistinctivePrecedential No. 43: TTAB Enters Partial Summary Judgment in 2(d) "VUDU" OppositionPrecedential No. 41: Applicant Loses Third-Party Registration Battle, TTAB Finds Floor… [read post]
16 Aug 2021, 5:00 am by Ernie Svenson
I’m a 35-year-old, nontraditional law student. [read post]
9 May 2012, 5:00 am by Doug Cornelius
Currently, a Rule 506 offering can have up to 35 non-accredited investors. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 7:39 am by Dennis Crouch
 The opinion notes that an ex post defense generated for litigation is does not remove culpability. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 12:40 pm by Robert Holden and Carlos J. Moreno
  The proposed rule does not change the exemption thresholds at this time, although the agency all but assures regulated entities that the exemption thresholds will be changed in the near future.[1]  However, the proposed rule modifies to some degree or another every other aspect of the current air regulations. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 5:21 pm by NL
On (1) and (2) the European Court found that, following Case C? [read post]