Search for: "Marks v. United States"
Results 601 - 620
of 9,151
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2009, 2:07 pm
" United States v. [read post]
26 Sep 2022, 6:19 am
Case date: 22 July 2022 Case number: No. 21-2786 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 7:20 am
Any private entity that believes someone is using an expired or invalid patent can file a criminal lawsuit in the name of the United States, without getting approval from or even notifying the Department of Justice. [read post]
20 Mar 2008, 10:34 pm
Without the question mark, that's Alaska's state motto.With the question mark, it's our title for a post analyzing the on-going trial in State of Alaska v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 5:42 pm
Mark J. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 6:03 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Feb 2021, 4:58 am
The United States Olympic Committee v. [read post]
10 Dec 2007, 4:09 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Nov 2022, 4:16 am
D & P Holding S.A.. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2014, 10:21 am
The agencies claim that, as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision in Rapanos v. [read post]
CA3: Police were objectively reasonable in entering a house they thought was abandoned but it wasn't
8 Aug 2012, 4:28 am
United States v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
Here the article invoked the same reasoning used by Chief Justice Marshall in United States v. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 3:52 am
First, the real plaintiff was the United States, not Simonian. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 1:00 pm
Here is the abstract: The United States Supreme Court in Sprint Communications Co LP v APCC Services Inc divided on the question whether an assignee for collection of federal debts satisfied Article III standing. [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 8:00 am
United States, 130 U.S. 581 (1889), also known as the Chinese Exclusion Case. [read post]
5 Jun 2018, 2:28 pm
United States for discerning precedent from a plurality opinion. [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 1:17 pm
United States v. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 12:23 pm
The Court stated the question thus: Does the Lanham Act allow the owner of a foreign mark that is not registered in the United States and further has never used the mark in United States commerce assert priority rights over the mark that is registered in the United States by another party and used in United States commerce? [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 9:22 am
United States v. [read post]
8 May 2025, 4:26 am
The court also upheld the Board’s finding that APR had effectively conceded a likelihood of confusion, but concluded that Heritage could not block registration without demonstrating protectable rights in its prior marks (Heritage Alliance v. [read post]
