Search for: "United States v. Ramsey"
Results 1 - 20
of 170
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Feb 2024, 1:43 pm
Things can be source identifiers, without being commercial source identifiers (United We Stand): confusion but not dilution actionable Jack Daniel’s didn’t purport to decide the full scope of the “noncommercial” exclusion. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 10:42 am
Hines, another American Giants alum who pitched for 8 years or so for the Ramsey (Unit) Hard Hitters. [read post]
12 Jan 2024, 9:30 pm
Mark Graber disputes the significance of the latest discovery of Josh Blackman and Seth Barrett Tillman related to whether the President is an Office of the United States for purposes of Section 3 of the fourteenth Amendment (Balkinization).ICYMI: The failed attempt to rename Brown v. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 1:51 pm
API v. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 8:07 am
Vidal v. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 8:32 am
VIP Products LLC (covered in this excellent post by Lisa Ramsey). [read post]
21 Jun 2023, 6:38 am
Ramsey [Lisa P. [read post]
11 Jun 2023, 6:09 pm
Tam and Iancu v. [read post]
4 Mar 2023, 4:38 am
It is extremely difficult to square the state bar’s version with what the prosecutor said, as recounted in Miller v Pate. [read post]
20 Feb 2023, 9:05 pm
Okla. 1984). 6 See United States v. [read post]
22 Jan 2023, 8:19 am
Supreme Court in June 1992 established the “Daubert Rule” in its landmark decision Daubert v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 2:26 pm
(Navajo and Hopi Indian Land Settlement Act of 1974)United States v. [read post]
21 Aug 2022, 9:10 am
For example, a clear statement is needed before a statute is read to interfere with a state's internal governance (Gregory v. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 1:39 pm
United States, 281 F.3d 1234, 1239–40 (Fed. [read post]
25 Jun 2022, 4:02 am
Introduction: Robert Burrell Australia/NZ is probably unusual b/c abandonment plays 3 distinct roles: (1) not a purely rhetorical device. 1863 case: from the moment you first use a TM, you have a property right—no goodwill, no reputation required. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 11:43 am
This test was first articulated by the United States Supreme Court in Illinois v. [read post]
4 Mar 2022, 9:18 am
’” The examining attorney at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) refused to register the proposed mark on the ground the phrase falsely suggests a connection with a person (here Donald Trump) in violation of Lanham Act Section 2(a), and also because this mark violates Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act. [read post]
31 Dec 2021, 4:12 pm
United States that Sheehan had a First Amendment right to continue publishing the classified material. [read post]
16 Sep 2021, 1:34 pm
History and Foreign Affairs Backdrop Behind MPP An important point to note is that MPP returns non-Mexican asylum seekers present in the United States to wait in Mexico for the pendency of their U.S. immigration proceedings. [read post]
9 Aug 2021, 7:33 am
United States, Jones v. [read post]
