Search for: "Rogers v. Rogers" Results 61 - 80 of 5,065
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Jan 2013, 4:09 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
The Board in Ex parte Rogers cites the 1876 base of Dunbar v. [read post]
2 Sep 2017, 1:26 pm by Stacey Lantagne
The Nowlan Family Trust, Civil Action No. 15-6231, dealing with issues around the trademark BUCK ROGERS. [read post]
25 Jun 2009, 1:45 pm
That skill came in handy this morning when a DVD -- the A/V portion of the presentation -- was a little late in arriving. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 8:55 am by Eric Schweibenz
(Shanghai Factory) (collectively “Respondents”) and the Commission Investigative Staff (“OUII”) opposed the motion, arguing that Deutsche Bank does not control and that the Commission’s traditional three-part balancing test for determining treatment of confidential business information articulated in Akzo N.V. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 10:10 am by Alex Gasser
  ALJ Rogers further denied, as unnecessary, APM’s request that any order granting HP’s motion include a statement clarifying that APM is not precluded from challenging the validity of these five patents in district court, in view of caselaw stating: “decisions of the ITC involving patent issues have no preclusive effect in other forums,” citing Texas Instruments Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 12:57 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Drape Creative, 909 F.3d 257 (9th Cir. 2018), the Honey Badger case, the Ninth Circuit began a process that could make Rogers v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 1:58 pm by admin
February 25, 2014 In an interesting and important decision issued by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on February 21st, the Court has now imposed a $500,000 civil administrative monetary penalty (“AMP”) against Rogers for failing to have performed adequate and proper testing in some Canadian markets for performance claims made in relation to its Chatr Wireless brand (see: Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 10:00 pm by Victoria VanBuren
 See our Part I in the series below and look for Parts II to V over the next few weeks. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 7:09 pm
Roger Alford has a post up at Opinio Juris commenting on the recent 9th Circuit opinion in Bauman v. [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 6:44 pm by admin
Earlier today the Competition Bureau announced the fairly long-awaited decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (per Marrocco J.) in the Rogers Chatr misleading advertising and performance claims case (Canada (Competition Bureau) v. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 1:59 pm by Mari Patterson
The Rogers test was adopted by the 9th Circuit in Mattel, Inc. v. [read post]