Search for: "Humphreys v. Humphreys"
Results 241 - 260
of 748
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Oct 2010, 12:01 am
Kachlon v. [read post]
29 Jun 2020, 7:51 am
Humphrey's Executor and Morrison v. [read post]
16 Jan 2020, 12:16 pm
And Humphreys busied himself ordering multiple people arrested people for failing to swear allegiance to the Confederate States of America. [read post]
12 Oct 2016, 12:12 pm
See Humphrey’s Executor v. [read post]
21 Aug 2006, 2:30 pm
Humphrey v. [read post]
22 May 2012, 12:08 pm
& Burberry Group, PLC v. [read post]
11 Oct 2015, 10:48 pm
The court therefore affirmed, finding that the trial properly sustained the plaintiffs’ administrative appeal. 347 Humphrey Street, LLC v Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of New Haven, 2015 WL 5687733 (CT App. 10/6/2015)Filed under: Current Caselaw, Variances [read post]
9 Jun 2020, 5:16 am
While the plaintiff’s filing of an application to register the SULKA mark in the United States was “certainly relevant” to intent to market products in the United States, it had little bearing on his ability to expand his business to the United States (Selah v. [read post]
3 Aug 2020, 7:12 am
Not only did appellee’s arguments have virtually no likelihood of success because the seller had waived them, but its actions in bringing the appeal were found to be a tactic to draw out the proceedings as long as possible while knowing that it had no viable substantive defense (Quincy Bioscience, LLC v. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 12:50 am
The district court was instructed on remand to determine whether the retailer consented to the publication (Sleepy’s LLC v. [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]
25 Nov 2019, 2:31 am
Fields Famous Brands, LLC v. [read post]
13 Mar 2020, 1:00 am
The court remanded trademark infringement and other claims brought by dietary supplement seller Charles Curry to the federal district court in Chicago for further proceedings (Curry v. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 4:44 am
The appellate court reversed a district court’s denial of the German company’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and remanded with instructions that the case be dismissed (C5 Medical Werks, LLC v. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 3:59 am
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in a summary order affirming the district court’s judgment (Oneida Indian Nation v. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 12:11 am
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit found that all of Engage’s asserted marks were merely descriptive and lacked secondary meaning, including sole only mark the district court deemed valid mark but not infringed by Intellisphere (Engage Healthcare Communications, LLC v. [read post]
8 Sep 2015, 7:00 am
” “‘Rick [Humphrey Bogart]: “My health. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 5:16 pm
By Lee DavisUnited States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2007, 12:35 pm
On Tuesday, the court heard en banc oral argument in Villegas v. [read post]
13 Mar 2007, 3:29 pm
Humphrey grounds. [read post]
