Search for: "COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO." Results 121 - 140 of 162
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jun 2011, 7:27 am by Kelly Phillips Erb
In many circles, Coca Cola has become the new Philip Morris. [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 12:09 pm by Mavrick Law Firm
Coca Cola Bottling Co., 260 F.3d 257, 261 (3d Cir. 2001) (“Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation”); Wrightson v. [read post]
12 Apr 2012, 10:11 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Textron cited as an example the Coca-Cola® bottle, noting that the bottle’s significant overall non-functional shape would not lose trademark protection simply because “the shape of an insignificant element of the design, such as the lip of the bottle, is arguably functional. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 9:06 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Then, we fill the iconic bottles with 100% natural pomegranate juice. [read post]
The Ninth Circuit decertified a class of consumers claiming that Coca-Cola falsely labels its drinks as having no artificial flavors when they contain phosphoric acid, ruling that consumers lacked standing to pursue injunctive relief. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:46 pm by Christopher Simon
Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 88 Ga.App. 241, 246, 76 S.E.2d 408 (1953), a case which closely parallels the facts here. [read post]
20 May 2010, 6:37 pm by Barry Eagar
 It imported and offered 144 bottles for sale in Australia. 15 bottles were sold after 7 May 2004 but prior to the transfer of the registered trade mark from Barefoot Cellars to Gallo on 17 January 2005. [read post]
15 Oct 2020, 1:32 pm by Silver Law Group
Plastic Partnerships Loop engaged in a number of corporate partnerships for recycling food-grade plastics, including Nestle, Coca-Cola, L’Oreal, Evian, and L’Occitane. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 4:59 am by Rebecca Tushnet
CocaCola Co., 679 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2012), wasn’t applicable; that case didn’t rule on preemption of state law claims, only preemption of Lanham Act claims. [read post]
4 Sep 2009, 6:12 pm by Dr. Jillian T. Weiss
The appeals court immediately focused on a similar case that it decided in 2001, the often-cited decision in Bibby v Philadelphia Coca Cola Bottling Co., 260 F.3d 257 (3d Cir. 2001). [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 12:32 pm by Colin Miller
BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, 450 F.3d 476 (10th Cir. 2006), explained, some courts have adopted the “cat’s paw doctrine. [read post]