Search for: "Word v. Ham" Results 21 - 40 of 100
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Aug 2013, 11:54 am by Bruce E. Boyden
The Ninth Circuit appeal, Joffe v. [read post]
17 Nov 2020, 7:40 pm by Linda McClain
”  What if government, he asked, contracted with a food distributor who, because “they are Orthodox Jews . . . want nothing to do with ham” or let anyone else distribute it? [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 2:17 am by gmlevine
In 2008, an unrelated group of Complainants “initiated a complaint” under the Australian Domain Resolution Policy (“auDRP”), National Dial A Word Registry Pty Ltd and others v. 1300 Directory Pty Ltd, DAU2008-0021 (WIPO March 6, 2009). [read post]
27 Dec 2022, 5:52 am by Eric Goldman
The Court concludes that the simple use of a word frequently used in relation to animal-based meats does not make use of that word in a different context inherently misleading * dotStrategy Co v. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 4:09 am by Edith Roberts
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Trump v. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 4:08 am by SHG
After all, shouldn’t every federal agency be allowed to make crimes at will, because they have dragons to slay, and it would be way too much work for Congress to do its job legislating such a big, complicated country like the United States without unelected back-office elves coming up with tens of thousands of ways to put people in prison for doing horrible things like selling “Turkey Ham” as “Ham Turkey” or with the words “Turkey”… [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 5:00 am
Allowing plaintiffs to pursue claims under consumer protection statutes in prescription medical product liability litigation is trying to pound a square peg into a ham sandwich. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 11:30 am
"Aceto" is a common Italian word meaning "vinegar", and although consumers might associate "balsamico" with the Consorzio's products, the basic root words "balsam" and "balm" also refer to an oily substance extracted as plant sap, which is said to have healing properties. [read post]
14 Jul 2014, 6:12 am
This type of facial challenge, which is restricted to cases implicating the 1st Amendment, requires a court to assess the wording of the statute -- without reference to the defendant's conduct’ (People v. [read post]
25 Dec 2022, 2:14 am by Aaron L. Nielson
In In re Dolly Varden Chocolate Co., decided in 1924, the Court reiterated that “the words ‘Merrie Christmas’ [do] not to constitute a valid technical trade-mark for ribbon. [read post]