Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 1201 - 1220
of 19,778
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 May 2012, 6:30 am
Today marks the 90th anniversary of the United States Supreme Court's seminal opinion in Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore v. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 10:46 am
”) (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 2:45 pm
In Abitron Austria GmbH, et al., v. [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 2:45 pm
In Abitron Austria GmbH, et al., v. [read post]
18 Aug 2016, 2:33 am
The Court, unanimously allowing the appeal, has marked a judicial shift from 32 years of previous law. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 8:05 am
Yesterday, the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in FLFMC, LLC v. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 4:51 am
Guido Kucsko also cautioned that OTK v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 3:58 pm
Ziebarth v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 3:58 pm
Ziebarth v. [read post]
20 Jul 2015, 2:43 am
| 3-D Lego trade mark | Garcia v Google | B+ subgroup | EU trade mark reform and counterfeits in transit | French v Battistelli | US v Canada over piracy | UK Supreme Court in Starbucks | BASCA v The Secretary of State for Business | Patent litigation, music, politics | Product placement in Japan. [read post]
Precedential No. 2: TTAB Affirms Refusal to Register Proposed Multi-Color Mark for Breakfast Cereals
9 Jan 2024, 4:16 am
In re Post Foods, LLC, 2024 USPQ2d 25 (TTAB 2024) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas V. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 3:28 am
James Barnard v. [read post]
26 May 2020, 3:15 am
Montecash LLC v. [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 5:58 am
Flanders v. [read post]
1 Jun 2015, 8:46 am
All state laws vary. [read post]
15 Oct 2021, 9:00 am
Trade mark disputes with accompanying passing off claims are nothing new. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 5:46 pm
On appeal, 3082 filed a further affidavit stating that PTC was licenced by 3082 to use ENTRE NOUS. [read post]
13 Apr 2012, 3:00 am
The case of the day is Shehadeh v. [read post]
