Search for: "Rogers Holdings, II, LLC" Results 1 - 20 of 57
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Oct 2022, 12:22 pm by Jake Abdo
[ii] You may be familiar with JHO’s line of BANG energy drinks. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 11:46 am by Ted Max
”[19] The Supreme Court emphasized that its opinion was narrow and that “[o]n infringement, we hold only that Rogers does not apply when the challenged use of a mark is as a mark” and [o]n dilution, we hold only that the noncommercial exclusion does not shield parody or other commentary when its use of a mark is similarly source-identifying. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 12:04 pm by Ted Max
”[19] The Supreme Court emphasized that its opinion was narrow and that “[o]n infringement, we hold only that Rogers does not apply when the challenged use of a mark is as a mark” and [o]n dilution, we hold only that the noncommercial exclusion does not shield parody or other commentary when its use of a mark is similarly source-identifying. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 11:54 am by Ted Max
”[19] The Supreme Court emphasized that its opinion was narrow and that “[o]n infringement, we hold only that Rogers does not apply when the challenged use of a mark is as a mark” and [o]n dilution, we hold only that the noncommercial exclusion does not shield parody or other commentary when its use of a mark is similarly source-identifying. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 12:37 pm by Meg Martin
Price, II, Judge.Representing Appellant Rice: Jeffrey A. [read post]
16 Jul 2009, 2:37 am
The stipulation also provides that the security for the note will be provided either by a letter of credit or by a security interest in JMI Holdings LLC’s economic interest in a San Diego hotel. [read post]
8 Nov 2018, 9:51 am by Jeremy Gordon
Judges Karen Henderson, Judith Rogers and Sri Srinivasan will review Roger Stone associate Andrew Miller’s appeal of an order holding him in contempt of court for his refusal to comply with subpoenas from Special Counsel Robert Mueller. [read post]
21 Jun 2023, 6:38 am by Eric Goldman
(Professor Farley and I propose such a test in Part III of our paper after we discuss the Rogers test in Part I and other speech-protective trademark doctrines like parody in Part II.) [read post]
24 May 2010, 5:26 am by Carter Ruml
After his pancreatic cancer diagnosis,  the “decedent decided to create another FLP (Cotton Row Family Limited Partnership, or CRFLP) to hold his interests in the Malkin LLCs and another two trusts for his children to hold limited partnership interests in that second FLP.” [read post]