Search for: "State v. Merchandise Seized"
Results 61 - 80
of 92
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 May 2012, 4:30 pm
In this case, the merchandise involved in the Section 545 offenses are classified as 'antiques,' and under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, Heading 9706, they are duty free. [read post]
16 Feb 2010, 1:06 pm
Co. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2015, 12:47 pm
Officials simultaneously seized evidence from the Markell’s home as well as their business, Silk Roads Design Gallery.The museum raids generated three published criminal cases:United States v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 9:25 am
The case is Sandhill Amusements, Inc. v. [read post]
7 May 2012, 5:53 pm
Attorney Richard Callahan's office seeks to resurrect the case of United States v. [read post]
17 Dec 2021, 7:00 am
The new policy underscores the need for further legislative reform including a revision of the Copyright and Performance Rights Act, the Plant Breeders Act, the Merchandise Marks Act, and the Trademarks Act. [read post]
9 Aug 2018, 7:24 am
Although Dollar General argued that the magistrate overlooked Perdue v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 11:34 am
For purposes of determining whether an Internet site conducts business directed to residents of the United States under subparagraph (A)(ii), the Commission may consider, among other indicators, whether (i) the Internet site is providing goods or services to users located in the United States; (ii) there is evidence that the Internet site is not intended to provide goods and services to such users or access to or delivery of goods and services to such users; (iii) the Internet site… [read post]
23 Jul 2014, 1:10 pm
In Coach, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Nov 2006, 6:26 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 6:00 am
United States .v Schultz, 333 F.3d 393 (2nd Cir. 2003); United States v. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 6:00 am
United States .v Schultz, 333 F.3d 393 (2nd Cir. 2003); United States v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 12:25 am
-Conn (IPKat) (EPLAW) EWHC (Ch): All threats, no action…: Best Buy Co Inc and another v Worldwide Sales Corporation Espana SL (IPKat) United States US General California’s Trade Secret disclosure statute doesn’t apply in Federal Court – or maybe it does (IP ADR Blog) US Patents USPTO wants to change restriction practice (Patent Baristas) The post-Bilski landscape: Why some tried, but failed, to ban ‘business method’ patents (Prior… [read post]
6 Oct 2022, 12:51 am
There are three paragraphs that stress the "central objective of CADE's efforts" ("o objetivo central da atuação do Cade"), which is that of every competition authority in the civilized world: to protect, in the interest of consumer welfare, the competitive process ("concorrência") (as the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit also emphasized in its FTC v. [read post]
6 Feb 2011, 1:04 pm
Vice President of Bing, Harry Shum, stated that"We do not copy Google's search results. [read post]
16 Oct 2012, 1:22 pm
The University of Iowa and The Board of Regents, State of Iowa v. [read post]
9 May 2012, 5:54 am
Ashley: Costco v. [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 2:00 am
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 2:54 am
(TorrentFreak) Global – Trade Marks & Domain Names No, ICE didn’t seize your domain; you’ve just been punked (ArsTechnica) ICANN development 2: Are you up for [.anything]? [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 7:06 pm
Kaylo, No. 07-30024 Denial of a habeas corpus petition alleging that state prosecutors had committed Brady violations is reversed where the prosecution had withheld material impeachment evidence during defendant's manslaughter trial. [read post]
