Search for: "Mark Case"
Results 1381 - 1400
of 70,927
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 May 2009, 1:10 pm
The Court also commented that even though the wares in this case were administered by physicians, consumer perceptions must still be included in the confusion analysis in prescription drug cases. [read post]
11 Aug 2017, 9:33 pm
., August 2, 2017) (affirming summary judgment ruling that worker was a loaned servant of one company rather than the employee of another)*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 5:28 pm
., February 3, 2017) (affirming summary judgement in favor of Delta Airlines because there was no violation of the FMLA, under which Branham had brought suit in the first place)*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
4 Nov 2016, 9:48 pm
., November 1, 2016) (affirming denial of disability benefits and supplemental income: the ALJ properly evaluated credibility, weighed the medical evidence, and properly denied her motion to strike the vocational expert's testimony)*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
25 Jun 2016, 7:21 pm
., June 2, 2016) (affirming denial of disability benefits: the administrative law judge's reasons for discounting the relevant medical opinions were neither insufficient nor illegitimate)*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
7 Oct 2016, 4:48 pm
., September 29, 2016) (affirming denial of disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits) *Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 9:38 pm
., July 31, 2015)(affirming summary judgement against Didier on claims for sexual discrimination, FMLA interference, and retaliation) *Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
31 Mar 2016, 6:05 pm
., March 29, 2016) (affirming denial of benefits because any ALJ error as to a limitation on supervisor interaction was harmless)*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 3:31 pm
., November 30, 2016) (affirming denial of disability benefits because Patterson's failed to satisfy disability criteria, the ALJ's credibility findings were supported by substantial evidence, and the appeals council properly declined to consider untimely records)*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
7 Mar 2017, 6:39 pm
A complex opinion which discusses sentences 4 and 6 of 42 USC 405(g))*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. [read post]
27 May 2011, 6:38 am
In this case, therefore, a trade mark has to be truthful with respect to source. [read post]
21 Apr 2023, 4:52 am
The post 5 Marks of What Makes a Good (and Bad) Lawyer appeared first on pissd.com. [read post]
8 Jun 2017, 3:37 am
"As to the stripes on the sweater, the Board found their absence to be a minor alteration (like the stylized gills or strips in the monster truck case) that does not create a different mark with a different commercial impression from that of the specimens. [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 12:10 am
Readers may remember Case C-283/01 Shield Mark NV v Joos Kist, trading as Memex, in which it was not Rembrandt who provided the cultural content but Ludwig van Beethoven.Merpel has some bad news for Bas and his colleagues, though: she has spotted some killer prior art, below: [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 3:37 am
It did not matter that Simonian's claims were generic as evidenced by the use of nearly identical allegations in more than forty false patent marking cases Simonian had filed in the Northern District of Illinois. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 12:57 pm
The new law is expected to result in the immediate dismissal of most patent false marking cases. [read post]
19 Oct 2007, 12:52 pm
A lawyer reader at TPM writes in to criticize Mark Geragos as counsel for Brent Wilkes. [read post]
4 Feb 2017, 6:18 am
"It's hard to tell exactly what's going on, but this seems like a much more complicated case than Peter Doig's. [read post]
27 Jul 2010, 4:34 am
VC: In some cases yes and in some cases no. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 11:11 am
The Martha Moxley case comes to mind as one of his turning points. [read post]
