Search for: "State v. Mark" Results 6921 - 6940 of 19,224
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 May 2014, 12:00 pm by Jason Rantanen
Ct. at 1289, 1293, 1297-98 (quotation marks omitted). [read post]
17 Dec 2021, 7:00 am by Chijioke Okorie
The application for the recordal must be made on a prescribed form and an annual recordal fee together with a separate fee for each class in which the trade mark is registered, is payable. [read post]
4 May 2009, 11:25 am
The North Carolina Supreme Court issued its ruling in North Carolina Department of Corrections v. [read post]
15 Dec 2024, 7:18 am by Eleonora Rosati
As it is stated in the EUIPO Guidelines, “the Office will refuse the mark when it can be perceived as describing the subject matter of the goods and services and thus has not the capacity to identify the commercial origin of the goods or services. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 4:23 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Here, contrary to the defendants’ contention, “in contrast to a private contract dispute, the practices alleged by the plaintiffs were not unique to these parties and involved an extensive marketing scheme that had a broader impact on consumers at large” (De Guaman v American Hope Group, 163 AD3d at 917 [citations and internal quotation marks omitted]; see Gaidon v Guardian Life Ins. [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 11:24 am by Rick Esenberg
Rick Esenberg is the founder, president and general counsel of the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, which filed an amicus brief in support of the state appellants in Gill v. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 11:43 am by Steve Hall
The lawsuit filed in state district court in Travis County, Bhuiyan v. [read post]