Search for: "Label v Label"
Results 7401 - 7420
of 13,306
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Aug 2012, 9:35 am
Alcon Research, Ltd. v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 6:30 am
In the case of Cook et al, v. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 3:58 pm
The Court ruled in Pliva v. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 10:49 am
If it seems odd that there will (hopefully) soon be a case captioned Violent J and Shaggy 2 Dope, et al. v. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 8:56 am
The court upheld a directed verdict for the defendants in Namundi v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 7:15 pm
In Krumpelbeck v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 2:31 pm
The case is Smith v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 11:44 am
Young Bickel served when Brown v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 11:44 am
Young Bickel served when Brown v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 6:00 am
Considering the adverse decision regarding Bridgeport v. [read post]
12 Aug 2012, 6:11 pm
An obvious example is Bolling v. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 5:22 pm
Citing Von Hannover v. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 3:43 pm
Tradeoffs: in TM, if you kick functional things to patent, you lose very little because there are so many other ways to indicate source: label, package, etc. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 10:20 am
Sager v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 3:46 pm
As evidenced by the Canadian government’s Bill C-12, the Canadian Privacy Commissioner’s guidelines entitled “Getting Accountability Right with a Privacy Management Program”, and the recent decision in Jones v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 7:52 am
There was once a dustup over the “Blue Ribbon” device in the 1932 case of Richard Hellman, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 2:45 am
If shoppers who see a clearly branded label will immediately know it is not the product they intended to buy, then one cannot rely on elements of that label to support passing-off on the basis of customers not seeing the label and being confused nonetheless. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 2:35 am
.'" Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 103 USPQ2d 1672 (Fed. [read post]
