Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 721 - 740
of 19,778
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Aug 2011, 9:11 am
"[Plaintiff] argues it should not have to pay any costs because it was acting in the public interest by bringing the lawsuit as a qui tam relator to help the United States enforce the false marking statute; and if anything, it should only be required to pay half of any allowable costs. [read post]
28 Oct 2024, 7:48 am
Furthermore, the appellate court reiterated that financial difficulties and litigation do not excuse nonuse or toll the running of the nonuse period (To-Ricos, Ltd. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 7:32 am
On May 28, 2014, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of State of Ohio v. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 4:13 am
Bras for the Cause Iowa, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 5:46 am
King Tuna, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 2:07 pm
" United States v. [read post]
11 Oct 2010, 12:59 pm
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s December 2009 “false marking” decision in Forest Group, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2007, 3:31 am
ITC Ltd. v. [read post]
30 Aug 2024, 2:32 am
Other examples are where the further dealings might seriously damage the reputation of the trade mark (see Portakabin Ltd v Primakabin, Case C-588/08 and Viking Gas v Kosan Gas, Case C-46/10) or give the impression that there is a commercial connection between the person responsible for those dealings and the trade mark proprietor and, in particular, the impression that that person’s business is somehow affiliated to the trade mark proprietor or… [read post]
7 Sep 2011, 3:51 am
Simonian v. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 4:52 pm
Before us in the present is a 49-page document docketed as 23-cr-80101 in the Southern District of Florida, conspicuously captioned: United States of America v. [read post]
8 Aug 2024, 4:38 am
Bureau National Interprofessionel du Cognac, Institute National de Appellations d'Origine v. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 5:56 am
Braille Battery, Inc. v. [read post]
29 May 2014, 2:48 am
Chanel, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 8:30 am
ESRT Empire State Building, LLC v. [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 7:30 pm
v What’s law got to do with it? [read post]
28 Dec 2017, 2:56 pm
”); NuVasive,842 F.3d at 1385 (stating that when the PTAB fails toarticulate its rationale, “judicial review cannot meaningfullybe achieved” (internal quotation marks, brackets,and citation omitted)). [read post]
13 Dec 2019, 4:15 am
Since first filing their United States trademark opposition suit in 2015, Monster has continued their court battle against the Raptors for the last four years with no known resolution to date. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 12:17 pm
Mitzi the dog is a rescue and was taken in an emaciated state from the streets but is now a fit 4 months old. [read post]
