Search for: "MARKS v. STATE"
Results 761 - 780
of 21,678
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Dec 2012, 12:01 pm
However, if a mark was registered or applied for before the dates of accession of new Member States, then the relevant territory, and therefore relevant public, is made up only of the States that composed the EU at the relevant time (Art. 165(4)(a)). [read post]
4 Mar 2022, 11:05 am
Dureska [3/4/22] Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States denied review in Savannah College of Art and Design v. [read post]
2 Feb 2010, 11:01 am
In Dirks v. [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 6:50 am
., Ltd. v. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 8:38 am
The CJEU today (in case in C-421/13, Apple Inc. v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt, see here) confirmed that the representation of the layout of a retail store, such as the one depicted below, may - subject to certain conditions - be registered as a trade mark. [read post]
9 Oct 2012, 3:00 am
s Baldwin v. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 2:46 am
So influential is this debate that, in his editorial capacity, he sometimes receives articles submitted for publication in JIPLP that state it as being axiomatic that a function of trade mark law (and often the only function of trade mark law) is the protection of the consumer.It's worth taking a look at the law in wider terms. [read post]
14 Apr 2021, 8:21 am
So, represented by a lawyer (Mark Javitch), she sued Twitter for violating her civil rights. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 4:22 pm
For example, in Forest Group, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Apr 2016, 12:55 pm
This morning the Court released a unanimous opinion in Evenwel v. [read post]
8 Mar 2024, 7:31 am
However, In Arsenal, the ECJ (as it then was) stated that the exclusive rights granted to a trade mark proprietor are “… to enable the trade mark proprietor to protect his specific interests as proprietor, that is, to ensure that the trade mark can fulfil its functions. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 9:17 am
Kaplinsky and Mark J. [read post]
12 Apr 2013, 2:52 am
In-N-Out Burgers 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]
20 Feb 2014, 6:53 am
Essentially, the regulation requires representations of marks to be clear and distinct. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 4:13 am
Bras for the Cause Iowa, Inc. v. [read post]
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]
9 Mar 2009, 2:07 pm
" United States v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 5:46 am
King Tuna, Inc. 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]
