Search for: "Lanham v. United States"
Results 141 - 160
of 1,021
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2021, 3:29 am
In this Ladas Memorial Award-winning article, the author considers the potential for a “Wild West” of obscene, profane, and vulgar trademarks used and registered in the United States following the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in Matal v. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 9:56 am
., P.A. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 3:36 pm
Co. v. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 9:43 am
In Matal v. [read post]
25 Oct 2007, 11:16 pm
Last Best Beef, LLC v. [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 9:18 am
Supreme Court just announced that it will weigh in on this case, Vidal v. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 1:45 pm
v. [read post]
3 May 2011, 3:12 pm
United Industries case suggested this could be accomplished by showing “defendant’s history of false advertising”). [read post]
17 Oct 2018, 11:31 am
LegalForce RAPC Worldwide P.C. v. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 2:48 pm
American Traffic Solutions, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Sep 2022, 9:35 am
PharmacyChecker.com v. [read post]
22 Sep 2014, 12:00 am
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has issued a decision in Gensler v. [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 7:04 am
Steele v. [read post]
28 Jul 2008, 10:54 am
The luxury goods manufacturer began selling its luggage in France in 1854 and in the United States in 1893. [read post]
Clothing Designs Are Subject Of Trademark Infringement Lawsuit In The Central District Of California
23 Sep 2008, 9:57 am
The complaint recites that the luxury goods manufacturer began selling its luggage in France in 1854 and in the United States in 1893. [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 10:15 am
. - The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to review the judgments of several Courts of Appeals in four intellectual property disputes. [read post]
26 Dec 2009, 6:04 pm
All One God Faith, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 2:24 am
Rather, the loser’s recourse is to commence a de novo law suit under the national law of its jurisdiction, which in the case of the United States would be a claim under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, [specifically, §1125(d) of the Lanham Act]. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 12:46 pm
On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision, holding that the so-called “disparagement clause” of the Lanham Act is an impermissible restriction on free speech under the First Amendment. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 12:46 pm
On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision, holding that the so-called “disparagement clause” of the Lanham Act is an impermissible restriction on free speech under the First Amendment. [read post]
