Search for: "Cave v. State" Results 321 - 340 of 512
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Dec 2011, 10:01 pm by Ken
In Aggravation: V. snarky assholes. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 4:11 pm by Ken
For a sense of just how badly wrong Marc is about the scope of the First Amendment, consider the recent dismissal of the twitter-stalking case in U.S. v. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 9:33 pm by Jacob Katz Cogan
Contents include:Monika Pauknerová, Treatment of foreign law in a comparative perspectiveSpiros V. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 4:18 am by Marie Louise
Newsru LTD (The IP Factor)   Netherlands Major Usenet provider ordered to remove all infringing content (TorrentFreak)   United Kingdom Expedited trials in English patent actions – HTC v Apple (judgment of Arnold J on 19th September 2011) (Kluwer Patent Blog) Newzbin2 team up with The Pirate Bay to defeat site blocking (TorrentFreak) EWHC (Pat): Halliburton gets simulation patent after all: Halliburton Energy Services v Comptroller-General of Patents (IPKat) (EPLAW)… [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
was originally posted on Copyhype FootnotesGrant v. [read post]
21 Sep 2011, 6:04 pm by Dwight Sullivan
Phil “My Liege” Cave notes on his blog that a CAAF petition was filed in United States v. [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 10:27 am by WSLL
Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division v. [read post]
12 Sep 2011, 9:13 am by WSLL
In other words, is ensuring the safety of the Vapor Cave a necessary action to keeping the Park in a state of good repair? [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 11:18 pm by Lara
            Related Posts: Trademark Attorney Ponders Parody — Yankees v Evil Enterprises LIKE Controversy? [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 3:54 pm by David Lat
”As those who have gone up against the firm in court know well, Irell isn’t the kind of place that caves. [read post]
5 Aug 2011, 8:30 am by emagraken
Thomas Estate (1985), 19 D.L.R. (4th) 594 (B.C.C.A.) at para. 47 and the reference therein to the speech of Viscount Cave in Donald Campbell & Co. v. [read post]
31 Jul 2011, 2:12 pm
US law has also protected geographic indications through common law trade mark law without need for a registration ( the "Cognac" case - Institut National Des Appellations v Brown-Forman Corp (TTAB 1998)).However, when it comes to produce and products which are of such strong cultural and heritage state significance like the New Mexico chile, it is the state's government that usually applies for a certification mark. [read post]