Search for: "Seabrook v. Seabrook"
Results 1 - 20
of 62
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jan 2024, 3:33 am
” Phat Scooters, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 11:05 am
Hughes: could compare cases where they narrow the claim of the TM registration v. narrow the claim of the patent—Maker’s Mark case where they have a registration for a wax seal but claim only red. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 9:37 am
Compare LVL XIII Brands, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2022, 4:49 am
" Forney Indus., 2020 USPQ2d 10310, at *6 (citing Seabrook Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Aug 2021, 11:49 am
Panel 2 – Copyright Enforcement: Faye Fangfei Wang, Resolving Copyright-related Cases Over the Internet with the Assistance of Artificial Intelligence in Europe Automated notice and takedown/Content ID with appeal mechanism as an example of how the new European rules are supposed to work. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 3:24 am
., 90 USPQ2d 1535, 1539-40 (TTAB 2009), aff’d, 96 USPQ2d 1681 The Board applied the ever-popular test of Seabrook Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Jul 2020, 5:28 am
Contents include:Special Issue on the Political Economy of Managerialism Matthew Eagleton-Pierce & Samuel Knafo, Introduction: the political economy of managerialism Samuel Knafo, Neoliberalism and the origins of public management Leonard Seabrooke & Ole Jacob Sending, Contracting development: managerialism and consultants in intergovernmental organizations Sarah Sharma & Susanne Soederberg, Redesigning the business of development: the case of the World Economic Forum and global… [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 7:54 am
Instead, the TTAB should have considered whether Forney’s mark makes such a strong impression on consumers that they will assume the trade dress is associated with a particular source, as outlined in Seabrook Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Apr 2020, 4:26 am
" Wal-Mart, 529 U.S. at 212.Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jan 2020, 3:12 am
Andrusiek v. [read post]
2 Oct 2019, 6:43 am
Corp. v. [read post]
3 Aug 2018, 4:00 am
[Selim v NYC Transit Authority, 220 AD2d 515]Terminating an employee for failing to turn in his keys when ordered. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 3:14 am
In determining whether a particular packaging is inherently distinctive, the Board considers the factors set forth in Seabrook Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2018, 12:00 am
”Citing Harlow v. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am
[Selim v NYC Transit Authority, 220 AD2d 515]Terminating an employee for failing to turn in his keys when ordered. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 4:04 am
That distinction is legally important because of the Supreme Court ruling in Wal-Mart v. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 10:19 am
On May 22nd, the United States Supreme Court, in Cooper v. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 5:28 pm
A 31-year-old male experiencing chest pains and numbness in his left arm was med-evaded from a fishing vessel Seabrooke 57 miles west-northwest of Cold Bay Sunday morning. [read post]
26 Sep 2016, 4:14 am
"Inherent Distinctiveness: To assess the inherent distinctiveness of the pattern, the Board followed Seabrook Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Sep 2016, 11:15 am
“[I]t may be useful to supplement that test with the test first introduced in Seabrook Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
