Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 601 - 620
of 21,513
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Dec 2018, 4:04 pm
In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 17-421 Filed: December 27, 2018 ALICE KIMBLE, Plaintiff, v. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 7:40 pm
See eBay Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2023, 1:42 pm
The outcome of the case was that LKQ (represented by Mark Lemley; MARK A. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 8:04 am
Is Article 5(1) and (3) of Directive 2008/95 ... to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks to be interpreted in such a way that it must be viewed as constituting “[use] in the course of trade” of a trade mark in a Member State if an undertaking enters into an agreement via a website in a third country for the sale and dispatch of goods bearing the trade mark to a private purchaser with an address known to the vendor… [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 12:15 am
… Consequently, jurisdiction … may be established solely in favour of Community trade mark courts in the Member State in which the defendant committed the alleged unlawful act. [read post]
26 Nov 2010, 4:55 am
In the recent North Carolina Court of Appeals case, Gardner v. [read post]
16 Dec 2020, 1:37 am
With reference to JLR v Ineos Holdings (see IPKat analysis here), it was noted that an initial recognition figure of 32.5% was statistically significant. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 8:47 am
Americans For Fair Patent Use, LLC v. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 12:02 pm
V. [read post]
Illinois Courts Grapple With Pleading Standard for Intent to Deceive Element of False Marking Claims
3 Sep 2010, 6:37 am
Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's qui tam false marking action for failure to state a claim was granted. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 2:22 am
Petróleos Mexicanos v. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 11:20 am
CEDC’s predecessor sold the vodka to Agros, a Polish state-owned undertaking. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 8:00 am
United States applied the classical theory, not the misappropriation theory; and United States v. [read post]
17 May 2016, 4:28 am
According to the French IP code, M&S was not entitled to demand the cancellation of those goods and services not cited against it by ISMS, and therefore the claims for cancellation should be accepted as far as they apply to those goods and services cited in the infringement claim but rejected for those not so cited.On the validity of CTM 5410998 SIMPLYRecognizing the need to consider the validity of the marks by reference to the average consumer in all EU member states,… [read post]
31 Aug 2019, 11:57 am
Marks on Behalf of SM v. [read post]
17 Dec 2007, 6:40 pm
As was stated by Lamer J. in Insurance Corp. of British Columbia v. [read post]
19 May 2014, 11:20 am
Saturday marked the 60th anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 8:27 am
"Neil Gorsuch's Independent Streak: At arguments in Carpenter v. [read post]
3 Nov 2020, 5:42 am
”[5] In Bush v. [read post]
3 Nov 2020, 5:42 am
”[5] In Bush v. [read post]
