Search for: "Label v Label"
Results 7581 - 7600
of 13,306
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jun 2011, 12:37 pm
Adam Thierer has already provided an excellent overview of the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. [read post]
28 Oct 2022, 9:20 am
University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 2:23 pm
As you read that summary, you might be wondering to yourself about the “egregious” label. [read post]
24 Aug 2016, 3:24 pm
In Blumenthal v. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 9:23 am
The applicant relied on the AS v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (case C‑541/18, IPKat here). [read post]
14 Oct 2020, 11:10 am
Sultan, meanwhile, draws the short straw and has to explain the mother of all metaphor bombs that exploded in the Supreme Court when the court took oral argument in Google v. [read post]
12 Jan 2024, 7:35 am
Dorris v. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 7:12 am
Boessenecker v. [read post]
28 Aug 2018, 7:36 am
One common argument in support of indecency regulations is that they merely restrict certain modes of expression, and leave people entirely free to express whatever ideas they like; as Justice Stevens put it, defending the indecency restriction in FCC v. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 2:15 am
for "adhesive-backed labels; adhesive-backed plastic film designating signatory action. [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 10:11 am
Julian v. [read post]
6 May 2014, 10:01 am
By Natalie Kuffel and Glen Hansen In R&R Pipeline, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Oct 2023, 10:58 am
Reed v. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 3:36 am
Remember Case C-462/09 Thiuskopie v Opus?]. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 11:55 am
Painters & Allied Trades District Council 82 Health Care Fund v. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 12:52 pm
Irvine v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 1:14 pm
City of Chicago v. [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 1:06 am
This misrepresentation must cause damage to the goodwill of the claimant.It was on the basis of this common-law test for passing off that the Supreme Court ruled (as discussed by this Kat) in May 2015 in the case of Starbucks (HK) and another v British Sky Broadcasting Group, holding that a claim for passing off required proof of goodwill as evidenced by actual business activity by the plaintiff in the jurisdiction. [read post]
3 Sep 2021, 10:16 am
Allen v. [read post]
13 Feb 2019, 9:16 am
Zillow has no obligation to take down (or revise) property value estimates to which the property owners object.From last week's Seventh Circuit decision in Patel v. [read post]
