Search for: "Holder v Jacob"
Results 1 - 20
of 110
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Nov 2020, 1:48 pm
Thereof at 14, Nirvana v. [read post]
25 Mar 2013, 4:28 am
Here is the opinion in Rodewald v. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 7:00 am
A: Recently, a federal judge issued a ruling in the case Daniel Milligan, et al., v. [read post]
26 Oct 2012, 1:47 pm
On October 18, 2012, in Windsor v. [read post]
12 Nov 2010, 12:58 pm
S’holders Litig. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 4:32 am
Earlier in July 2023, a blog post by Jacob van de Kerkhof discussed the shortcomings of the recent Grand Chamber judgment in Sanchez v. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 6:27 am
Brandt Revocable Trust v. [read post]
8 Jul 2019, 3:02 pm
Co. v. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 5:19 am
Even though social media account holders have not been held liable of illegal comments before, this does not violate requirements of accessibility and foreseeability in law. [read post]
6 Dec 2007, 10:30 am
S’holders Litig., 2007 Del. [read post]
5 Aug 2024, 7:00 am
In this video, attorney Jacob Sapochnick discusses a hot topic addressing what is the fastest method to immigrate a foreign spouse to the United States. [read post]
3 Jan 2007, 1:41 am
" [citing Guttman v. [read post]
8 Mar 2021, 7:00 am
While the V visa is currently available only to spouses and minor children of green card holders. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 7:52 am
The Kat brings news of the decision of the Court of Appeal (Sir Robin Jacob providing a judgment with which Ward and Patten LJJ agreed) in the latest round of the Schütz v Werit dispute ([2011] EWCA Civ 927) – this time on the interpretation of s68 PA 1977. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 4:22 am
Mr Justice Nugee heard the application and what follows is taken from the transcript.He was keen from the outset to inspect the physical samples of the products, confirming the approach to registered design cases advocated by Sir Robin Jacob in Dyson v Vax:“What really matters is what the court can see with its own eyes. [read post]
15 Feb 2019, 5:46 am
The photographer brought a claim against Hadid [Peter Cepeda v. [read post]
22 Nov 2021, 6:00 pm
Helpful Links November 12, 2021 Policy Memorandum Shergill v. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 2:57 am
However, controversially, this right will be lost if the declarant or holder of the goods can prove in infringement proceedings that the EUTM holder is not entitled to IP protection in the country of destination: both reversing the previous burden of proof and putting new onus on EUTM holders to consider where their trade marks are protected. [read post]
