Search for: "Humphreys v. Humphreys"
Results 221 - 240
of 748
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2019, 9:46 am
Inc. v. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 4:30 am
The court refers to the CJEU case C 251/95 SABEL BV v Puma AG, Rudolf Dassler Sport, 11 November 1997 to hold that the mere association which the public might make between two trademarks as a result of their analogous semantic content is not in itself a sufficient ground for concluding that there is a likelihood of confusion. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 3:32 am
The Eleventh Circuit agreed with that conclusion based on the plain language of the licensing agreement and affirmed the lower court’s decision (Kroma Makeup EU, LLC v. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 2:50 am
Gustavo GiayOn 26 September 2018, Division II of the Federal Court of Appeals of the City of Buenos Aires issued a decision in “Re adidas AG v. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 12:37 am
In case C-21/18, Textilis Ltd and Ozgur Keskin v Svenskt Tenn Aktiebolag, decided on March 14, 2019, the CJEU was asked whether the wording “other characteristics” of the new Article 7(1)(e)(iii) Regulation 2015/2424 may or may not be applied retroactively. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 1:02 pm
Humphrey. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 6:12 am
More from our authors: Mediation: Creating Value in International Intellectual Property Disputes by Théophile Margellos, Sophia Bonne, Gordon Humphreys, Sven Stürmann € Design Rights, Functionality and Scope of Protection by Chris Carani€ 199 [read post]
1 Apr 2019, 9:14 am
But here is a sense of the range of national and state legislation and presidential action the Court held unconstitutional in one 17-month period starting in January, 1935: the NIRA, both its Codes of Fair Competition and the president’s power to control the flow of contraband oil across state lines; the Railroad Retirement Act; the Frazier-Lemke Farm Mortgage Moratorium Act; the effort of the president to get the… [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 2:39 am
More from our authors: Mediation: Creating Value in International Intellectual Property Disputes by Théophile Margellos, Sophia Bonne, Gordon Humphreys, Sven Stürmann € Design Rights, Functionality and Scope of Protection by Chris Carani€ 199 [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 1:00 am
More from our authors: Mediation: Creating Value in International Intellectual Property Disputes by Théophile Margellos, Sophia Bonne, Gordon Humphreys, Sven Stürmann € Design Rights, Functionality and Scope of Protection by Chris Carani€ 199 [read post]
23 Feb 2019, 11:28 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 8:44 pm
C-487/07, L’Oreal v Bellure), recognized that there are other functions, in particular that of guaranteeing the quality of the goods or services in question and those of communication, investment or advertising which deserve protection. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 12:32 am
In affirming a district court’s dismissal because use of the marks constituted nominative fair use, the appeals court concluded that Applied’s service was not readily identifiable without use of the trademarks, the seminar creators used only so much of the trademarks as was reasonably necessary, and use of the trademarks did not suggest sponsorship or endorsement (Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 9:22 am
Humphrey. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 8:14 am
Second, in a 1935 Supreme Court case called Humphrey’s Executor v. [read post]
23 Jan 2019, 8:00 am
Smith v. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 8:18 am
Whether Humphrey’s Ex’r v. [read post]
12 Jan 2019, 4:05 pm
Trump had refused to criticize Russia on the campaign trail, praising President Vladimir V. [read post]
2 Jan 2019, 4:25 pm
Other cases, including Gros v Crook ((1969) 113 SJ 408) and Citizens Life Assurance Co Ltd v Brown ([1904] AC 423) appeared to support that approach. [read post]
27 Dec 2018, 1:04 am
The Federal Circuit reversed the ITC’s determination that Laerdal failed to plead its trade dress claims with adequate detail, vacated the ITC’s decision that no relief was warranted, and remanded to the ITC to determine the appropriate remedy after consideration of public interest concerns (Laerdal Medical Corp. v. [read post]
