Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 1501 - 1520
of 19,778
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Feb 2015, 12:23 pm
The Court stated the question thus: Does the Lanham Act allow the owner of a foreign mark that is not registered in the United States and further has never used the mark in United States commerce assert priority rights over the mark that is registered in the United States by another party and used in United States commerce? [read post]
16 Feb 2022, 4:03 am
Jacobs v. [read post]
18 May 2018, 4:03 am
" New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. [read post]
9 Jun 2022, 12:57 pm
The third trimester, by contrast, marked the point at which a State’s interest in the fetus’s potential of human life becomes compelling, per the Roe Court. [read post]
27 Dec 2019, 4:16 am
American Polo Association, LLC v. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 7:07 am
Id.CareFreeEnzymes Inc. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 6:18 am
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia has affirmed, on summary judgment, the TTAB's precedential decision in RxD Media, LLC v. [read post]
28 Jan 2016, 3:07 am
Spirits, 563 F.3d at 1353, 90 USPQ2d at 1493; see Corporacion Habanos, S.A. v. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 5:57 am
” Watson v. [read post]
29 Nov 2021, 11:13 am
Brittex Financial v. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 9:39 pm
The question marks above are not rhetorical. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 8:29 am
This appears for example at paragraph 67 of the judgment of Sir Mark Potter P in Charman v Charman [2007] 1 FLR 1246 (Charman (No 4)) where he says:“… the starting point of every inquiry in an application of ancillary relief is the financial position of the parties. [read post]
4 Dec 2022, 5:20 am
NARA v. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 4:15 pm
But that ruling, in Marks v. [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 10:52 am
In Interprofession du Gruyere v. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 6:18 am
Today marks the first in a week-long hearing in the military commission case of United States v. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 5:43 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2016, 2:00 am
United States. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 4:12 am
Judge Johnston granted defendant’s motion to amend adding state law disparagement and defamation claims in this Lanham Act case involving plaintiff’s 21ST CENTURY SMOKE and defendant’s 21ST CENTURY SMOKING marks. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:56 am
Today marks the first of a possibly three-day, pre-trial motions hearing in the military commission case of United States v. [read post]
