Search for: "United States v. Paris Wells"
Results 41 - 60
of 432
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Feb 2007, 7:22 pm
Voda v. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 7:08 pm
By Justin Silverman A French court last month stomped on what we in the United States consider a “basic, vital, and well-established liberty” – the right to record and publish the public activity of police. [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 7:45 am
In the United States a prosecuting attorney has absolute discretion to prosecute or not to prosecute. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 12:23 pm
The Court stated the question thus: Does the Lanham Act allow the owner of a foreign mark that is not registered in the United States and further has never used the mark in United States commerce assert priority rights over the mark that is registered in the United States by another party and used in United States commerce? [read post]
7 May 2021, 7:07 pm
The importance of children’s rights in the context of climate change is explicitly recognized in the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in which States are called on to respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on, among other things, the rights of the child and intergenerational equity when taking action to address climate change.1 Part II addresses the issue of “jurisdiction. [read post]
31 Mar 2022, 12:18 pm
The court was particularly persuaded of this considering how the Louisiana Supreme Court has defined the relationship between unit operators and unleased mineral owners, as well as considering the prior ruling in J&L Family, LLC v. [read post]
24 Sep 2019, 12:12 am
Together with The Picasso Project, the Zervos has been the subject of a long legal battle which ended last week with a decision of the the United States District Court Northern District of California San Jose Division.BackgroundIn 1979, Yves Sicre de Fontbrune, the original plaintiff in the case, acquired Cahiers d’art and the rights to the Zervos.In 1995 Wofsy published The Picasso Project.In 1996, after copies of two volumes of The Picasso Project were… [read post]
15 Oct 2012, 7:58 am
The video, however, did not “indicate” knowledge or use in the United States. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 2:38 pm
Poverty can be grim and corrosive, and social mobility in the United States is not what it used to be. [read post]
4 Mar 2016, 8:58 am
Then Caliburger cooked up it’s next plan: restaurants in the United States. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 2:46 pm
United States Sugar Corp. [read post]
4 Apr 2007, 12:27 am
ITC Limited v. [read post]
16 Jan 2007, 3:48 pm
Quest Recovery Services, Inc., 06-263 The Court GVR'd this ADA case to the 6th Circuit so that it could consider both the views of the United States as intervenor and the Court's decision in United States v. [read post]
1 May 2009, 11:36 am
Furthermore, while Section 44 was “generally intended” to implement elements of the Paris Convention, In re Rath, 402 F.3d at 1207, 74 USPQ2d at 1177, it does not, through subsections 44(b) or (h) or otherwise, provide the user of an assertedly famous foreign trademark with an independent basis for cancellation in a Board proceeding, absent use of the mark in the United States. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 1:45 pm
v. [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 3:02 pm
” Khamenei also accused the United States of trying to divide Iraq along sectarian lines and urged Iraqis to oppose any such U.S. efforts. [read post]
2 Jan 2022, 8:17 am
This bifurcated system leads to a curious dynamic in United States patent law, namely between (i) patent infringement (as a question of fact) and (ii) claim construction (as a question of law or a mixed question of fact and law) decided by a judge. [read post]
15 Dec 2006, 11:22 am
[of] all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented invention . . . in such manner as to actively induce the combination of such components outside of the United States,” as well as the “suppl[y] . . . from the United States [of] any component of a patented invention that is especially made or especially adapted for use in the invention. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 9:30 pm
Supreme Court—in Hughes v. [read post]
19 Nov 2020, 7:25 am
ZTE and Conversant v. [read post]
