Search for: "Fine v. Fine"
Results 8381 - 8400
of 16,011
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 May 2015, 3:47 am
Patent rights play a finely-balanced role in the economy. [read post]
6 Jan 2016, 10:33 am
" United States v. [read post]
20 Jul 2022, 9:55 am
Wade and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
14 May 2017, 10:57 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Aug 2023, 2:13 am
The Court went on to find that the degrees of both visual and aural similarity between the two marks was low to medium, in all relevant territories.The Court carefully went through both parties’ sales evidence (with a fine-tooth comb, I might add!) [read post]
8 Jul 2020, 4:03 pm
In Oncale v. [read post]
24 May 2019, 8:35 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 8:30 am
Here is the third of three sets of discussion questions on Dobbs v. [read post]
5 May 2021, 2:09 pm
In 1974, in Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 10:47 pm
& Ors. v M1 Limited & Ors. [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 2:01 am
* A Kat's 2016 Copyright AwardsAt the end of last year (though it was only 2 weeks ago…), intelligent IPKat Eleonora Rosati brings us a fine year-end summary of the notable highlights in the world of copyright; plus, the “top 2 important issues” that are worthiest of attention in 2017. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 10:37 am
Zalewski v. [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 7:52 am
” Fine, if true. [read post]
6 May 2019, 7:55 am
Telebrands Corp. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 4:00 am
Judges Nathan and Netburn also disagreed with Escape's argument that pre-1972 sound recordings should be excluded, with Judge Nathan citing the recent decision in Flo & Eddie, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Feb 2019, 1:10 pm
And it is clear under Tennessee v. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 4:54 pm
This Kat would say that it is not actually the official task of national courts and trade mark registries around Europe to pull some of this nonsense off its stilts, bring it down to earth and shape it up into propositions that can be easily understood and applied by ordinary folk, but that does occasionally happen, and Aveda Corporation v Dabur India Ltd [2013] EWHC 589 (Ch) is one such case.Aveda v Dabur Uveda is a decision of Mr Justice Arnold in the Chancery… [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 1:12 pm
Wang: Art v. [read post]
27 Feb 2013, 11:07 am
And so the Supreme Court said that while it's not OK to kill the insane, it's perfectly fine to kill crazy people as long as they aren't insane in a particular way.The Court decided Ford v. [read post]
22 May 2018, 10:33 am
" The canonical example include Lochner, but Coppice v. [read post]
