Search for: "Character v. State"
Results 1061 - 1080
of 6,776
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jul 2019, 9:28 am
In The Patissier LLP v Aalst Chocolate Pte Ltd [2019] SGIPOS 10, the Applicant (The Patissier LLP) sought to revoke the mark(“Subject Mark”) registered in the name Aalst Chocolate Pte Ltd, on the ground of non-use under S 22(1)(a) and (b) of Singapore’s Trade Marks Act (“TMA”). [read post]
5 Dec 2006, 9:08 pm
United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164; Watson v. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 9:34 am
It could be argued, as in the Onassis v. [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 11:13 am
In R v. [read post]
21 May 2011, 12:08 pm
Much of what is being said about Rakofsky is being said in 140-character snippets on Twitter. [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 4:05 am
Wisconsin Cheese Group, LLC v. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 2:55 am
Holder Suisse S.A. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 2:00 am
Pandian v. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 2:11 pm
Evans and Lawrence v. [read post]
7 Jun 2020, 1:00 pm
… In Kindred Nursing Centers, L.P. v. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 4:06 pm
In its recent judgment in Stomakhin v. [read post]
30 May 2011, 9:30 am
Benney v. [read post]
23 Sep 2008, 10:46 am
O’Leary v. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 6:52 am
Georgia, 219 Ga. 345, 133 S.E. 2d 367 (Ga. 1963); State v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 7:24 am
On appeal, however, it was found that the mark had become distinctive, within the meaning of Article 7(3), in the German and English-speaking member states. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 4:37 pm
The investigating body sent a confidential Letter of Request to a foreign state seeking information and documents relating to him. [read post]
26 Nov 2007, 1:41 pm
He case is Green v. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 2:25 pm
In June, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in City of Ontario v. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 9:53 am
State and Crain v. [read post]
27 May 2015, 2:31 am
In addition, since United States is the most important trading partner for the EU, those who specialise in umbrella trade should be expected to consult the USPTO register.Design in Case T-23/13In respect of the parameters for assessing distinctive character, the Board of Appeal concluded that the freedom of the designer was limited when applied to the shape or size of an umbrella. [read post]
