Search for: "United States v. Mark" Results 141 - 160 of 10,336
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Sep 2018, 11:45 pm by Nicholas Kaster
Diamond Hong, Inc., United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, No. 2018-1688, 27 August 2018 appeared first on Kluwer Trademark Blog. [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 12:16 am by Joseph Arshawsky
Cosmetic Warriors Ltd., United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. 17-55325, 29 June 2018 appeared first on Kluwer Trademark Blog. [read post]
14 May 2009, 9:51 pm
United States, 221 U.S. 1 (1911) the Supreme Court of the United States found Standard Oil guilty of entering into contracts in restraint of trade and monopolizing the petroleum industry through a long convoluted series of anticompetitive actions. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 1:00 pm by McNabb Associates, P.C.
ARTICLE V Extradition shall not be granted in any of the following circumstances: 1. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 1:55 pm by randal shaheen
The district court held that Stauffer did lack standing to assert a false marking claim because he had not sufficiently alleged an injury in fact to the United States or to himself. [read post]
2 Apr 2007, 10:04 am
EPA "recalls the previous high-water mark of diluted standing requirements, United States... [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 6:56 am by Peter Reap
Greater Omaha Packing Co., Inc., United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, No. 18-1152, 15 November 2018 appeared first on Kluwer Trademark Blog. [read post]
6 Sep 2019, 4:15 am by James Nurton
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that an EU trade mark (EUTM) proprietor may bring an infringement action in an EU Member State where advertising or offers for sale are directed or located, in a case concerning alleged infringement of an EUTM in the United Kingdom by a Spanish defendant. [read post]
23 Nov 2010, 10:01 am by Justin E. Gray
Recently, a defendant in a false marking case pending before the Western District of Pennsylvania (FLFMC v. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 7:18 pm by Wells Bennett
Military Commissions Chief Prosecutor Mark Martins released a statement following the completion of yesterday’s hearing in United States v. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 2:49 am by NCC Staff
The committee said it was clear, to it, that “the 14th amendment to the Constitution has no effect whatever upon the status of the Indian tribes within the limits of the United States,” but that “straggling Indians” were subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 6:34 am
Gallegos, supra (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). [read post]