Search for: "GLASS v. STATE"
Results 881 - 900
of 1,799
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Dec 2013, 5:30 am
In STATE, EX REL. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 9:01 pm
In Allen v. [read post]
25 Jul 2014, 6:00 am
Brentwood Glass Co. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2019, 6:00 am
Brentwood Glass Co. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 1:01 pm
By the same token, the White Queen in Through the Looking Glass famously boasted she was able to believe "six impossible things before breakfast. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 10:55 am
V. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 9:17 am
In other words, maybe the consumer buys BRAINSTRONG anyway, even if she knows there is a high chance it won't work or even a small chance it might hurt her.My favorite example of the "materiality" limitation on the deceptiveness bar is the GLASS WAX trademark upheld in Gold Seal Co. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2009, 12:00 am
See Corning Glass Works v. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 12:44 pm
Anderson v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:36 pm
General Excavator Co., 290 U.S. 240 (1933) 19 USPQ 228 (1933), Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 9:29 am
Hirsch Glass Co., 467 Fed.Appx. 651 (9th Cir. 2012) (coloring and color blends are uncopyrightable elements); Baby Buddies, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 10:49 pm
Safe Work New South Wales v Austral Hydroponics P/L; Safe Work New South Wales v Eang Lam [2015] NSWDC 295 Safe Work NSW has brought a successful prosecution against a Company Austral Hydroponics Pty Ltd (Austral Hydroponics) and its Director Mr Eang Lam (Mr Lam). [read post]
23 May 2017, 7:16 am
The Supreme Court confirmed that regime in its 1957 decision in Fourco Glass v Transmirra Products. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 5:30 am
Haw 2014http://t.co/FuNgfsMbUn -> Copyright in glass etchings found infringed SKYLINE DESIGN, INC. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 1:42 pm
Under the respondents’ theory, if a single contractor is retained to supply the glass, install the glass, and do the construction cleanup, the scratches on the windows would not be covered by the insurance. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 2:43 pm
Panel decisions in favor of criminal defendants are now sometimes corrected en banc, rather than going up to the Supreme Court to add to the Ninth's notorious reversal rate.One such decision was a fairly standard case on premeditation, United States v. [read post]
10 Mar 2009, 3:46 pm
Years ago in the case of Whren v. [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 11:35 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 8:00 pm
The case is Bacote, et al v. [read post]
20 Feb 2013, 9:01 pm
Under the 1971 case of Lemon v. [read post]
