Search for: "Moskowitz v. Mark" Results 1 - 20 of 50
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Nov 2020, 5:39 am by Sarah M.D. Luth
On the basis of these factors, the Board found that Lucasfilm established its claim of likelihood of confusion, and registration of Moskowitz’s mark was refused. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 3:25 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Thereafter, "the burden shifted to the plaintiffs to aver evidentiary facts establishing that the case falls within an exception to the Statute of Limitations" (Savarese v Shatz, 273 AD2d at 220 [internal quotation marks omitted]). [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 9:06 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Co. v Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, 56 AD3d at 9 [internal  quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Krouner v Koplovitz, 175 AD2d 531, 532 [1991]). [read post]
20 May 2008, 6:31 am
Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Mark Dwyer of counsel), for respondent. [read post]
19 May 2006, 9:32 am
The appeal was argued by Katherine Zalantis of Silverberg Zalantis LLP, who acted as co-counsel with Mark Anesh of Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP on the appeal. [read post]
19 May 2006, 9:32 am
The appeal was argued by Katherine Zalantis of Silverberg Zalantis LLP, who acted as co-counsel with Mark Anesh of Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP on the appeal. [read post]