Search for: "State v. Mark" Results 1081 - 1100 of 19,778
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Oct 2019, 12:15 pm by Eric Goldman
Arguably, we might view the period right before RTBF’s launch as the high-water mark of Internet freedom. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 7:01 am by Jason Nardiello
 The registration states “women’s high fashion designer ? [read post]
9 Nov 2006, 9:11 pm
The various federal courts across the United States apply a number of different factors to determine whether the use of a mark is likely to cause confusion with a previously-existing mark. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 7:05 am by Docket Navigator
[Plaintiff] therefore imports these products into the United States, and it was required to mark them under Section 287(a). [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 12:02 pm
A little more than a year ago, back in February 2008, a majority of the Supreme Court stated, in Riegel v. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 4:34 am by Christopher Brown, Matrix
On 25 February 2015, the Supreme Court handed down its judgments in R (oao Rotherham Metropolitan BC and Ors) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2015] UKSC 6. [read post]
24 Apr 2024, 1:52 am by Yosi Yahoudai
It marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered a state ban since Roe was reversed. [read post]