Search for: "MARKS v. STATE"
Results 641 - 660
of 21,519
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Nov 2023, 10:08 pm
Building on this, in Impresario Entertainment v. [read post]
9 Nov 2023, 9:01 pm
The legal system of the United States has its roots in the laws of England. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 1:26 pm
Trademark: In Jack Daniel’s v. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 12:08 pm
The new framework was established by the court in its 2022 decision from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 8:04 am
Supreme Court in Apple v. [read post]
7 Nov 2023, 10:09 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 6:00 am
And in 2001 the Supreme Court ruled in Alexander v. [read post]
4 Nov 2023, 5:25 pm
Harrell v. [read post]
4 Nov 2023, 3:40 am
Decisions this Week United StatesPennsylvania State Police v. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 1:26 pm
See TRADER JOE’S COMPANY, a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 1:26 pm
See TRADER JOE’S COMPANY, a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 5:01 am
Todd V. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 5:01 am
This culminated in the famous Terry v. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 4:06 am
Instagram, LLC v. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 9:57 am
ShareWednesday’s argument in Vidal v. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 8:27 am
Case Citation: Duffer v. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 3:07 pm
Heller and in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 8:53 am
The Federal Circuit heard the case on appeal from the TTAB and reversed, stating that rejecting the mark based on Section 2(c) violates Elster’s First Amendment rights. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 8:02 am
He stated that, although the EASY family of trade marks had acquired distinctiveness, the threshold for distinctiveness was set very high and the "EASY" trade mark had not acquired distinctiveness on its own. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 5:17 am
[with implications for the pending Supreme Court case of United States v. [read post]