Search for: "Light v. United States"
Results 6761 - 6780
of 11,342
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2007, 10:58 am
My friends cut-and-paste allow a quick summary from the Eighth Circuit's official opinion page:062965P.pdf 05/18/2007 United States v. [read post]
5 May 2017, 11:24 am
Affinity appealed to thiscourt and the Director of the United States Patent andTrademark Office (Director) intervened. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 9:48 am
Following today’s order, the court of appeals will now reconsider this case in light of June Medical. [read post]
21 Dec 2016, 6:16 am
At that point, Soto-Perez called the Crimes Against Children Unit (CACU) and Det. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 10:33 am
The United States Supreme court in South Dakota v. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 10:33 am
The United States Supreme court in South Dakota v. [read post]
23 Apr 2008, 11:49 am
State of Indiana (NFP) David Long v. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 3:54 pm
California and United States v. [read post]
28 Nov 2023, 10:41 am
United States, were functionalist decisions affirming new and innovative efforts to make the government more efficient. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 2:51 am
Said the Court, the high rating position of links to the CTM proprietor’s website could be justified in the light of the earlier mark’s well-known character in the United States; they did not show that EU consumers were familiar with the earlier mark, given that no evidence was provided of its market share, of how intensive, geographically widespread and long-standing its use was, of the investment in its promotion and of how significant a portion of… [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 7:48 am
This phrase, as well as its accompanying ‘Walking Fingers’ logo, are registered trade marks in many countries around the world, including the UK, Canada, and Australia – though curiously not the United States. [read post]
1 Jan 2012, 8:19 am
Milwaukeeans had to wait until December 12 to learn that the United States Supreme Court had denied the state’s petition for certiorari. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 10:20 am
Co. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 10:20 am
Co. v. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 4:37 pm
Since the statute of limitations is intended to give defendants "the protections of predictability and promptness" (quoting United States v. [read post]
23 Feb 2014, 4:20 pm
Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. (1968), and United States v. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 11:34 am
Co. v. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 8:30 am
Second, citing text and history, we've contended that because the President does not hold "office . . . under [the United States]," he is not subject to the Foreign Emoluments Clause (which extends only to those who hold "office . . . under [the United States]"). [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 7:46 am
Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2009) (suspension of writ of habeas corpus unconstitutional); United States v. [read post]
22 Jul 2017, 5:01 am
However, in light of the fact that courts must step in to resolve disputes between parents concerning the well-being of their minor children, the court recognized that the state of NJ has an interest in protecting both the physical and psychological well-being of its children – including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth. [read post]
