Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 9781 - 9800
of 19,272
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Feb 2007, 8:27 pm
Aventis Pharma v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 10:55 am
State. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 10:55 am
State. [read post]
23 May 2013, 5:00 am
Not that PLIVA v. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 8:38 am
Citizens United v. [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 11:18 pm
Related Posts: Trademark Attorney Ponders Parody — Yankees v Evil Enterprises LIKE Controversy? [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 6:44 pm
The massive hurdle is, as stated, confusion. [read post]
2 Mar 2012, 5:38 am
Bank v. [read post]
13 Mar 2010, 3:11 pm
See AutoZone, Inc. et al v. [read post]
10 Aug 2016, 6:00 am
It certainly does not hurt those opposing the CRAFT BEER ATTORNEY mark that the TTAB stated in this decision, albeit a non-precedential one, that “no amount of evidence can transform a generic phrase into a registrable trademark” citing Miller Brewing Co. v. [read post]
8 May 2007, 8:02 am
On one hand, a mark owner must police use of the mark in order to maintain rights in the mark, but on the other hand, enforcement cannot be so zealous as to wrongfully pursue fair uses of the mark. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 2:57 am
Srour, 2010 NY Slip Op 213, * 1 [2d Dept Jan 12, 2010] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see also Cherry v. [read post]
4 Apr 2017, 11:50 am
The statutory issue in Dean v. [read post]
25 Aug 2020, 8:45 am
In Heinze v. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 10:26 am
Holly Hollman is general counsel for the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, which submitted an amicus brief in support of the respondents in The American Legion v. [read post]
25 Jul 2015, 4:30 am
The latest episode of the UK saga “and what do we do with data retention laws” has been issued by the English High Court, with its judgement in the case David Davis and Ors v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 2092 (Admin). [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 1:41 pm
Attorneys (AUSAs) filed a Government’s Sentencing Memorandum in the case of United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 7:13 am
In early October the Supreme Court granted certiorari in an Ohio case, State v. [read post]
8 May 2012, 6:31 pm
Id. at 1380 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Schering Corp. v. [read post]
8 May 2009, 9:53 am
The case of Medinol Ltd. v. [read post]
