Search for: "State v. Champagne"
Results 41 - 60
of 181
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Oct 2012, 1:15 am
First, for the reasons stated at [16]-[18] above, this construction of the Champagne Heidsieck principle should not be accepted. [read post]
22 Jun 2015, 1:19 pm
In a case called Lexmark v. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 7:50 am
That means that §602(a)(1) allows the importation into the United States of a copy of a protected work purchased abroad. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
The French court of appeal cancelled the French marks and assigned the name domain « France.com » to the State of France. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 6:28 am
The caption of the case differs from the “State v. [read post]
29 May 2010, 7:48 pm
However, Peter King of Sports Illustrated stated that the decision may not be the champagne-popping moment for the NFLPA. [read post]
5 Oct 2018, 10:46 am
Related Cases: Lexmark v. [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 1:34 am
Early Bird Standard = £510 Early Bird Group Ticket / IBIL Sponsor / UCL alumni = £433.50 Standard fee = £600 Standard Group Ticket / IBIL Sponsor / UCL alumni = £510 More information: here Fashion Law Seminar: Common Law v. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 4:34 am
Multilateralism v Bilateralism: What’s in it for international IP regulation? [read post]
31 Jul 2011, 2:12 pm
US law has also protected geographic indications through common law trade mark law without need for a registration ( the "Cognac" case - Institut National Des Appellations v Brown-Forman Corp (TTAB 1998)).However, when it comes to produce and products which are of such strong cultural and heritage state significance like the New Mexico chile, it is the state's government that usually applies for a certification mark. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 10:59 am
But everyone should keep the corks in the champagne. [read post]
22 Jan 2017, 11:49 am
| The champagne of trade mark disputes | Around the IP Blogs! [read post]
20 Sep 2009, 10:07 pm
" Comite Interprofessionel du Vin de Champagne v. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 9:42 am
The Tax Court in Whistleblower 22716-13W v. [read post]
12 May 2015, 4:45 am
When Jim Tyre sent me the decision in United States v. [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 5:50 am
State v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 2:08 am
Nicholas J points out, however, that the High Court stated that s 123 embodies the principle in Champagne Hiedsieck. [read post]
23 Mar 2024, 10:39 am
State v. [read post]
25 Nov 2017, 8:38 pm
At the party you had one too many glasses of Krug Champagne. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 8:48 am
It’s not time to break out the champagne in Cincinnati, however, as the same day a unanimous court also reversed the Sixth Circuit in United States v. [read post]
