Search for: "S.A. v. Review Board" Results 61 - 80 of 205
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Mar 2006, 12:12 am
The Board said no in Tequila Cazedores, S.A. de C.V. v. [read post]
7 Dec 2009, 7:00 am
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (08-861) â€" constitutionality of Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s creation of accounting review board Florida v. [read post]
25 Nov 2012, 8:10 am by Thomas G. Heintzman
” On June 28, 2011, or one day before the seventh anniversary of the closing of the Credit Agreement, a slate of director nominated by Group Lactalis S.A. was elected to the board of directors of Parmalat Italy. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 6:34 am by Ronald Mann
  Then in Board of Trustees of Stanford University v. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 5:33 am by Nedim Malovic
According to case law, applicants typically face difficulties in demonstrating the inherent distinctiveness of non-conventional trade marks and this is testified by the fact that most cases pertaining to non-conventional trade marks, spanning from 2021 to 2024, deal with the issue of inherent distinctiveness.The significant departure test for distinctivenessFor a trade mark to possess distinctive character, it must serve to identify the goods in respect of which registration is applied for as… [read post]
6 Sep 2011, 5:55 am by admin
In the case Miguel Torres, S.A. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 3:27 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
Olympic Airlines S.A. v The Trustees of the Olympic Airlines S.A. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 2:10 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
Olympic Airlines S.A. v The Trustees of the Olympic Airlines S.A. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 12:53 pm
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, et al. (08-861)– constitutionality of Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s creation of accounting review board Florida v. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 2:16 am by Kevin LaCroix
(Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile, S.A, or SQM), the world’s largest producer of iodine and lithium and a major potash producer, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against the company and certain of its directors and officers. [read post]