Search for: "In Re Standard Commercial Tobacco Co."
Results 1 - 20
of 66
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Mar 2012, 6:02 am
If it’s to accomplish some other purpose, then ordinary First Amendment scrutiny should apply, not the more relaxed Central Hudson standard. [read post]
17 Oct 2014, 6:00 am
Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 7:00 am
R J Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2019, 1:50 pm
Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 12:21 pm
In re Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. [read post]
25 Nov 2014, 12:31 pm
Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. [read post]
4 Mar 2016, 1:32 pm
Assignment Two (You’re on your own now): Review the Employment Standards Act and Ontario Reg. 285/01, and that answer the following questions: Is a mink farmer entitled to overtime pay? [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 3:27 pm
However standards for workplace safety in Maryland and around the country are required, not optional. [read post]
4 May 2022, 4:07 pm
***WARNING: This article contains some strong language*** On 27 April 2022, the UK’s advertising watchdog, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), banned an outdoor poster which promoted an estate agent, trading as Lamb & Co. [read post]
14 Jul 2008, 9:17 am
First, on August 20, 2007, In re Seagate Technology, LLC changed the standard of willful infringement from one akin to negligence to that of objective recklessness. 497 F.3d 1360, 1371 (Fed. [read post]
27 Dec 2021, 4:44 am
" In re Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1690 (Fed. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 6:02 am
Reynolds Tobacco Co., 2005 WL 2088909, at *3 (E.D. [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 7:48 am
Product labels are commercial: propose a transaction. [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 9:53 am
In Taubman Co. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2021, 2:37 pm
Eli Lilly & Co. v. [read post]
14 Jan 2019, 3:53 am
See, e.g., In re Brown Jordan Co., 219 USPQ 375 (TTAB 1983) (holding that stamping the mark after purchase of the goods, on a tag attached to the goods that are later transported in commerce, is sufficient use). [read post]
16 Apr 2022, 2:49 pm
Cir. 1983); Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 6:00 am
Of course, whether reliance and causation are elements of a UCL claim is an unresolved question that the Supreme Court is expected to address in In re Tobacco and Pfizer. [read post]
9 Feb 2018, 4:00 am
But here, the UCL and FAL claims are based on standards set forth in an approved state plan, and which therefore preempt any federal standards. [read post]
9 Feb 2018, 4:00 am
But here, the UCL and FAL claims are based on standards set forth in an approved state plan, and which therefore preempt any federal standards. [read post]
