Search for: "Matal v. Tam"
Results 21 - 40
of 290
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Oct 2019, 2:00 am
University of Florida Levin College of Law-—Simon Tam, lead singer of The Slants and author of the book, Slanted: How an Asian American Troublemaker Took on the Supreme Court, presents tonight, Racial Disparagement or Free Speech: The Case of Matal v. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 12:53 pm
"UCLA School of Law's Supreme Court clinic wins landmark trademark case; The victory in Matal v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 1:04 pm
The Tam case (Matal v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 9:25 am
Tam, formerly Lee v. [read post]
27 Aug 2020, 4:15 am
Tam and Iancu v. [read post]
5 Sep 2018, 1:59 pm
Recently in Matal v. [read post]
24 Aug 2018, 9:23 am
In ex parte appeal to TTAB, applicant argues that Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act violates the First Amendment under Matal v. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 9:34 am
Recently in Matal v. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 5:51 pm
Matal v. [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 9:59 am
Matal v. [read post]
31 Aug 2021, 9:02 pm
In ex parte appeal to TTAB, applicant argues that Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act violates the First Amendment under Matal v. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 2:45 pm
Tam, 2019’s Iancu v. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 2:45 pm
Tam, 2019’s Iancu v. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 7:00 am
This week’s Matal v. [read post]
30 Jun 2017, 10:08 am
After a unanimous Supreme Court decision last week in Matal v Tam rebuked the Patent and Trademark Office for violating the First Amendment in refusing to process trademarks it found offensive, the Department of Justice has surrendered to the Redskins: via hotair.com So much for the "Washington Persons of Interest. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 7:15 am
In its landmark ruling in Matal v. [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 9:17 pm
The Brunetti decision follows closely behind the Court's 2017 opinion in Matal v. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 8:53 am
In Brunetti, the Federal Circuit extended Matal v. [read post]
2 Nov 2017, 11:43 am
The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Matal v. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 12:15 pm
As largely expected, the Court followed its own lead in Matal v. [read post]
