Search for: "STATE v. MARQUES"
Results 1 - 20
of 170
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
Recent Hague Convention District Court Cases - Galli v Marques, 2021 WL 7451915 (M.D. Florida, 2021)
21 Mar 2022, 5:17 am
Galli v Marques, 2021 WL 7451915 (M.D. [read post]
24 Oct 2008, 4:34 am
By way of example, there is already OHIM case law relating to designs used on toy cars as opposed to real cars (Supermarked A/S v Ferrari SPA, ICD 842, 13 November 2006), as well as a decision of the Court of Appeal of England & Wales relating to a design that can function as both a laundry aid, and a massage device (Green Lane Products Ltd v PMS International Group Plc & Ors [2008] EWCA 358). [read post]
25 May 2011, 6:11 am
Marques v. [read post]
28 Jul 2018, 2:32 pm
Dep’t of Parks & Recreation for State of Cal. v. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 1:20 pm
See, e.g., Braun, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 3:00 am
R. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2018, 2:27 pm
Relying on Petrella v. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 1:09 pm
OTR sued West, asserting various claims under the Lanham Act and state law. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 1:24 pm
Et nous venons d’apprendre que la demande de marque a été rejetée par le USPTO (i.e., United States Patent and Trademark Office). [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 1:51 am
While governance of the European patent system continues to preoccupy many of us, MARQUES -- the European trade mark organisation -- has just fired off a salvo or two of its own in the direction of the effective functioning of the parallel trade mark systems for the Community trade mark and national or regional marks within EU Member States. [read post]
6 May 2010, 11:54 am
The United States Court of Appeals has issued a decision in regards to U.S. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2018, 5:58 am
MARQUESalso posts on the recent CJEU opinion, Red Paralela and others v Orangina Schweppes, concerning the effect of the exhaustion of rights rule of Article 7(1) Trademark Directive on the right of a trademark owner to oppose the importation of goods affixed with the trademark, when the trademark was placed on the goods by an assignee of the trademark in another EEA member state. [read post]
17 Jan 2021, 7:50 am
§ 101 (Simio v. [read post]
28 Aug 2018, 1:05 pm
”); see also Int’l Café, S.A.L. v. [read post]
28 Aug 2018, 1:20 pm
’” See Barcelona.com, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Nov 2017, 12:26 am
€$€The Authors' Take:-- Disparaging or offensive trademark registrations in the United States Are there any limits after the US Supreme Court's decision in Matal v Tam? [read post]
22 Mar 2009, 4:51 pm
In Ogden v. [read post]
28 Apr 2008, 5:00 am
General Motors Corp. v. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 4:32 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 1:28 pm
Marie-Andree Weiss of The 1709 Blog discusses the Paramount Pictures Corp. v. [read post]
