Search for: "State v. Mark T."
Results 1 - 20
of 11,185
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Aug 2009, 5:19 pm
T’s daughter’s private parts. [read post]
12 Feb 2009, 1:19 pm
Mark William Ivey v. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 4:00 pm
Additional Resources: Marks v. [read post]
25 Feb 2008, 1:35 pm
In United States v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 12:44 pm
The Opinion of Advocate General Wahl was published today in Case C‑125/14 Iron & Smith Kft v Unilever NV, a request for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) from the Hungarian Fővárosi Törvényszék -- that's the Budapest Municipal Court, if you didn't know ["I knew that", said Merpel ...]. [read post]
22 Jun 2016, 7:49 am
ESRT Empire State Building, L.L.C. v. [read post]
11 Dec 2022, 9:56 am
The position of the EUIPO, when it comes to acquired distinctiveness through use in the UK for the purposes of an invalidation action against a registered EU trade mark (EUTM), is that the distinctiveness acquired through use in the UK is not relevant for EU trade mark applications filed after the end of the transition period (December 31st, 2020).However, the now said has not always been entirely clear, since case law (Decathlon v EUIPO (T‑349/19)… [read post]
19 Mar 2007, 9:00 pm
"See Knight Textile Corp. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 2:24 pm
United States, ruling that the government generally can’t access historical cell-site location records without a warrant. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 8:49 am
John Bean Technologies Corp. v. [read post]
4 Dec 2017, 8:22 am
In Marks v. [read post]
11 Nov 2013, 9:19 pm
The designThe case concerned is Chen v OHMI - AM Denmark (Dispositif de nettoyage), T-55/12 of 25 April 2013 and can be retrieved here. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 7:53 pm
Marks v. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 4:43 am
His decision in People v. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 6:49 am
The Court then summarized the case law regarding the required proof:In addition, according to case-law, although it must be proved that a mark has acquired distinctive character through use throughout the European Union, the same types of evidence do not have to be provided in respect of each Member State (...).Furthermore, the Court has repeatedly held that there was insufficient proof of distinctive character acquired through use of a mark throughout the European Union… [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 11:20 am
It was not controlled by state law. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 2:39 pm
Unique Product Solutions, Ltd. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 9:22 pm
(Afro Leo says check here for background.)The topic of his lecture was “Deprivation of Trade Marks through State Interference”. [read post]
Recent Decision Highlights Importance of Pleading Compliance with the Federal Patent Marking Statute
26 Apr 2019, 6:16 am
See Express Mobile, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 1:15 am
Paul’s Retail Pty Ltd v Lonsdale Australia Limited [2012] FCAFC 130 Société Anonyme des Manujactures de Glaces v. [read post]
