Search for: "State v. Wines"
Results 881 - 900
of 1,026
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2009, 4:36 pm
Carlton Fields Fishing Trip Sponsored Topics: Mark Cuban - sport - Dallas Mavericks - United States - InsiderTrading [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 3:08 pm
" In fact, the wrongness has to be as overpowering as a very old and very dead fish, per the Fourth Circuit's opinion today in TFWS, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 7:34 am
Also, fine wine and Fellini films. [read post]
9 Jul 2009, 3:25 am
Baude, et al. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 1:03 am
Interesting (albeit irritating) liquor law decision out of the Second Circuit: Arnold's Wines Inc. v. [read post]
7 Jul 2009, 1:00 am
[www.nylj.com]
Subscription required for online access unless otherwise noted:
Arnold's Wines Inc., plaintiffs-appellants v. [read post]
5 Jul 2009, 2:23 pm
Instead, the Eastern District is known as having the most patent infringement lawsuits filed of any district in the United States and the most claimant-friendly with patent owners wining 77% of trials. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 4:08 am
The Appellate Division quoted from the New Jersey Supreme Court’s opinion in State v. [read post]
24 Jun 2009, 12:05 pm
[It does not shed light on why Champagne Louis Roderer filed suit in the great non-wine-making state of Minnesota.] [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 2:47 pm
Heald struck down state laws that permitted in-state -- but not out-of-state -- wineries to sell wine directly to in-state consumers as state discrimination against interstate commerce in violation of the dormant commerce clause. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 3:00 am
(China Law Blog) China plans for 50% increase in number of patent agents (IAM) IP rights and Chinese producers: you live and die by the jump shot (IP finance) Copyright Administrative Punishment Implementation Rules (2009) (IP Dragon) Denmark Court finds no infringement in wine bottle battle: Udesen Danmark v Excellent Wine Danmark A/S (International Law Office) Europe ECJ rules on bad faith in chocolate bunnies case: Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Spruengli (IPKat)… [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 3:00 am
(China Law Blog) China plans for 50% increase in number of patent agents (IAM) IP rights and Chinese producers: you live and die by the jump shot (IP finance) Copyright Administrative Punishment Implementation Rules (2009) (IP Dragon) Denmark Court finds no infringement in wine bottle battle: Udesen Danmark v Excellent Wine Danmark A/S (International Law Office) Europe ECJ rules on bad faith in chocolate bunnies case: Chocoladefabriken Lindt &… [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 6:25 am
Both were highly intoxicated by that time, Bitsy having consumed five Margaritas and four glasses of wine. [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 9:46 am
Kelly, which involved the regulation of internet wine sales. [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 4:52 am
Last week, in Montejo v. [read post]
1 Jun 2009, 7:05 am
It may be hiding in plain sight in US patent database (IP Asset Maximizer Blog) Interview with Mike Drummond of Inventors Digest (IP Watchdog) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: Impact of merger/buyout on prior agreement to not challenge patent validity: Epistar v ITC (Patently-O) (ITC 337 Law Blog) CAFC affirms in part, reverses in part, vacates in part and remands Linear Technology Corporation v ITC (ITC 337 Law Blog) CAFC: Genetech & Volkswagon… [read post]
25 May 2009, 5:20 pm
(The IP Factor) Israel Patent Office practice regarding legal expenses in oppositions (The IP Factor) New Zealand New Zealand launches second ACTA consultation (Michael Geist) United Kingdom EWHC request for summary judgment denied - OHIM-IPO class heading conflict case: Daimler v Sany (IPKat) United States US General Trade secret litigation on the rise against laid off employees (Silicon Valley IP Licensing Law Blog) Seeking and justifying attorney… [read post]
22 May 2009, 7:45 am
The defendant is the State of New Jersey (Governor and Secretary of State). [read post]
18 May 2009, 7:10 am
California (08-897). ** A challenge to the constitutionality of laws in Indiana and other states that bar a winery — out-of-state or in-state — from selling or shipping wine directly to residents unless the buyer has had one face-to-face meeting with the winery to identify himself or herself. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
