Search for: "Marks v. State"
Results 1881 - 1900
of 19,797
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Nov 2007, 8:47 pm
He was State v. [read post]
12 Sep 2018, 1:48 pm
Thus, not only would proponents of liberal constitutional change need to secure ratification from all states where she crossed the 40% mark – a group including states such as Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas – they also would have to pick up five states that voted more than three-to-two against Senator Clinton. [read post]
13 Jan 2010, 1:17 pm
"I guess having the state buy you meat -- or, more likely, meat-like items -- for six years is another way to go "camping" too. [read post]
13 Jul 2007, 8:51 am
Mark III Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Oct 2022, 10:00 am
Bank v. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 2:29 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 12:00 pm
Kremerman v. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
The French court of appeal cancelled the French marks and assigned the name domain « France.com » to the State of France. [read post]
15 Dec 2022, 4:23 am
Status Symbol Clothing Brand LLC v. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 7:20 am
Leapers, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 4:15 am
Mark Walsh has a first-hand account of today’s opinion announcements for this blog. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 4:10 am
Section 2(b) prohibits registration of any mark that “consists of or comprises the ... insignia of ... any State or municipality .... [read post]
12 Feb 2008, 5:31 am
Follow the process of the still ongoing ConnectU v. [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 2:57 am
It states that the dotted lines are used to “merely depict placement of the mark” on the packing backer card. 37 C.F.R. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 5:24 am
Kaull v. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 5:44 am
Chanel established that it began using its mark in the United States in the 1930s, and the mark has consistently been ranked as one of the most recognized and famous brands in the United States. [read post]
22 Mar 2013, 11:51 am
United States (common law adoption)* State Courts BulletinCases featured:Williams v. [read post]
23 May 2016, 11:26 pm
State of Utah (Utah, May 18,2016) (declaring unconstitutional the Labor Commission's sliding fee schedule for attorneys representing injured workers because the Utah Constitution explicitly grants exclusive authority to govern the practice of law to the state supreme court, which "undoubtedly" covers the regulationof attorney fees)*Jones v. [read post]
1 Jul 2012, 11:01 pm
The delay question came up in passing in Footnote 3 of United States v. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 10:38 am
I've now had a chance to read the Fifth Circuit's opinion in SEC v. [read post]
