Search for: "United States v. Mark"
Results 1281 - 1300
of 9,474
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Dec 2013, 4:31 pm
by Mark A. [read post]
7 Dec 2013, 4:31 pm
by Mark A. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 5:17 am
The United States Supreme Court has affirmed the decision of the U.S. [read post]
31 May 2011, 9:10 am
The following is excerpted from the Syllabus and Opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States' in the above-captioned case decided today, May 31, 2011, obtained from Cornell University Law School's Legal Information Institute: After respondent SEB invented an innovative deep fryer, obtained a U. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 2:56 pm
Under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act it is required that the party opposing registration demonstrate rights to a registered mark or rights to “a mark (or trade name) previously used in the United States and not abandoned. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 2:56 pm
Under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act it is required that the party opposing registration demonstrate rights to a registered mark or rights to “a mark (or trade name) previously used in the United States and not abandoned. [read post]
11 Feb 2009, 11:30 pm
Pamela Chestek, at her Property, Intangible blog, reports (here) that the Joyce Theater Foundation had filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, under 15 U.S.C. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 2:32 pm
United States and Printz v. [read post]
5 Dec 2018, 7:22 pm
United States. [read post]
22 Jul 2018, 1:39 pm
United States v. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 3:03 pm
To resolve this issue, one party must demonstrate they used the mark in commerce before the other party, thereby entitling that party to register the trademark at the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO). [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 7:59 am
It has a United States and United Kingdom registrations for this logo. [read post]
10 Oct 2022, 6:23 am
Haaland v. [read post]
29 Oct 2008, 8:23 pm
A Supreme Court ruling for Wyeth in Levine v Wyeth would nationalize the Michigan disaster and prevent all United States citizens from pursuing big pharmacuetical companies for the devastating consequences of bad drugs. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 7:33 am
Moreover, there is no evidence that any United States marks come as close to VOGUE as Applicant’s EVOGUE mark. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am
The Supreme Court [of the United States] subsequently rejected such inferences as incompatible with ordinary contract principles under federal law in M and G Polymers USA, LLC v Tackett (574 US 427 [2015]) and CNH Industrial N.V. v Reese (583 US 138 S Ct 761 [2018]), repudiating International Union, United Auto., Aerospace, and Agric. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am
The Supreme Court [of the United States] subsequently rejected such inferences as incompatible with ordinary contract principles under federal law in M and G Polymers USA, LLC v Tackett (574 US 427 [2015]) and CNH Industrial N.V. v Reese (583 US 138 S Ct 761 [2018]), repudiating International Union, United Auto., Aerospace, and Agric. [read post]
26 May 2010, 3:00 am
The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that agreements among associate members to license their trademarks to one vendor may violate the Sherman Act. [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 8:30 am
Evans’s understanding of equality in United States v. [read post]
CA9: Stop suppressed as based on a hunch and represented at suppression hearing as a mere conclusion
18 May 2012, 4:50 am
United States v. [read post]
