Search for: "Arnold v. Arnold" Results 1481 - 1500 of 2,142
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Mar 2011, 10:36 am by WSLL
Arnold, Judge.Representing Appellant (Claimant): Bill G. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 5:29 pm by Cal Law
Arnold Schwarzenegger has not said when he plans to swear in his pick for lieutenant governor. [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 6:10 am
After “a jury convicted [Arnold Maurice] Mathis of several child exploitation offenses” and the U.S. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 6:50 am
It was in the course of this nostalgic meander through the warm and sunny days of July that he stumbled on a case which is actually quite interesting, and even important if you like beer and roses: Samuel Smith Old Brewery v Philip Lee (trading as Cropton Brewery) [2011] EWHC 1879 (Ch), a ruling by Mr Justice Arnold, Chancery Division, England and Wales, 22 July 2011. [read post]
23 Jul 2020, 12:42 pm by fjhinojosa
Beyer was recently mentioned in Hunter, Jr. v. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 4:32 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In addition, defendants note that prior to serving the Bill of Particulars, Longhi retained Arnold E. [read post]
5 Jul 2021, 7:40 am by Frantzeska Papadopoulou
  We also still had a referral pending at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Nokia v Daimler. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 8:17 am
     The removal of the own name defence and fundamental rights – Sky v SkyKickSky v SkyKick [2017] EWHC 1769 (Ch) (July 2017)Most trade mark lawyers know Sky’s reputation for pursuing action against anyone using the word SKY in their name, even SKYPE. [read post]
1 Aug 2023, 2:13 am by Eleonora Rosati
The IPKat is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend Alessandro Cerri regarding the recent judgment of the High Court of England and Wales in the Lifestyle Equities v Berkshire Polo trade mark dispute. [read post]
15 Aug 2020, 4:05 am by Nedim Malovic
The survey showed some degree of recognition of the shape and a level of association with JLR, but not recognition of the shapes as trade marks, i.e. as designating the goods of JLR and no other's.For those reasons, the Court was satisfied that the Hearing Officer had carefully and fairly assessed the survey evidence in a way which disclosed no error of principle.CommentWhat this case essentially confirms is the approach previously adopted by Arnold J (as he then was) in… [read post]