Search for: "Board of Trade v. United States"
Results 161 - 180
of 2,210
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Sep 2014, 4:32 am
Recently, a Portuguese wine company, Wine Vision Lda. sought to register the mark “NOPA” in standard characters for “wines” through the United States Patent and Trademark Office. [read post]
6 Sep 2022, 4:12 pm
This was, of course, the Act at issue in Monsanto v. [read post]
25 Sep 2023, 9:01 pm
Background The backdrop for these actions is the Commodity Exchange Act’s (CEA) treatment of retail commodity transactions, defined for these purposes as contracts entered into on a leveraged or margined basis with persons who are not “eligible contract participants,” where the underlying commodity is not delivered within 28 days.5 Such transactions must be conducted on or subject to a board of trade designated or registered by the CFTC as a contract market,… [read post]
25 Nov 2013, 8:20 am
[The Board granted a petition to cancel five registrations for the marks EDGE, THE EDGE, GAMER'S EDGE, and CUTTING EDGE for video games, printed matter, and related goods and services, in view of a final judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in Edge Games, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 8:59 am
First, the opinion indicates that in some cases, jurisdiction requires trading to occur in the United States. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 4:15 pm
[v] Section III. [read post]
14 Dec 2021, 2:22 pm
United States, 284 F.3d 1261, 1274 (Fed. [read post]
4 Dec 2009, 8:17 am
In anticipation of the decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
13 Nov 2014, 11:54 pm
United States. [read post]
5 Nov 2008, 11:34 pm
., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), affirmed a decision by the United States Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (USPTO Board) rejecting claims in a U.S. patent application as unpatentable in view of 35 U.S.C. 101 as not being directed to patentable subject matter. [read post]
17 Sep 2012, 2:45 pm
United States, 607 F.3d 771, 773 (Fed. [read post]
16 Oct 2008, 12:15 pm
In Connolly v. [read post]
31 Dec 2012, 3:29 pm
Noah Kravitz), LinkedIn (Eagle v. [read post]
25 Apr 2018, 5:00 am
” EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom agreed, stating that the EU-U.S. trade negotiation should not be hindered by “artificial deadlines. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 2:18 am
The Board placed emphasis on the place of the use of the mark in arriving and their decision, stating that there was strong evidence suggesting that Standard Hotels in the United States despite documentation referring to advertisements and promotional campaigns targeting EU customers. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 6:12 am
United States Int’l Trade Comm’n, 988 F.2d 1165, 1171 (Fed. [read post]
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]
3 Jun 2014, 10:35 pm
Prokopi and the forfeiture case of U.S. v. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:26 pm
For that purpose we consider the legal position of the subsidiary units of government in the United States and their relationship to federal power. [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 10:07 am
United States is a classification case from the U.S. [read post]
