Here’s how to get more nuanced and relevant search results:
FOR THESE RESULTS... USE THE SYNTAX... FOR EXAMPLE...
Both terms must be present and trademark and infringement
Either term must be present or trademark or infringement
Exclude a term not trademark not infringement
Enclosed quotation (exact match) "  " "trademark infringement"
Unidirectional search, left to right: in armed robbery w/5 gun, "gun" occurs to right of "armed robbery." w/# armed robbery w/5 gun
Bidirectional search: in armed robbery near:5 gun, "gun" occurs to either to right or left of "armed robbery." near:x armed robbery near:5 gun
Grouping search terms ( ) (bike or scooter) w/3 (injury or accident)
Expand root word by any number of letters ! liab! yields liable or liability
This Document Cites the Following Cases:
Coughlin v. Regan
768 F.2d 468 (1985) | Cited 33 times
ALINE ERVIN v. COUNTY LOS ANGELES
109 S. Ct. 1125 (1989) | Cited 45 times
WILFREDO MAISONET v. CONNECTICUT
109 S. Ct. 1127 (1989) | Cited 45 times
This case is cited by:
Citation is not available at this time. Please check back later.
Here’s how to get more nuanced and relevant search results:
FOR THESE RESULTS... USE THE SYNTAX... FOR EXAMPLE...
Both terms must be present and trademark and infringement
Either term must be present or trademark or infringement
Exclude a term not trademark not infringement
Enclosed quotation (exact match) "  " "trademark infringement"
Unidirectional search, left to right: in armed robbery w/5 gun, "gun" occurs to right of "armed robbery." w/# armed robbery w/5 gun
Bidirectional search: in armed robbery near:5 gun, "gun" occurs to either to right or left of "armed robbery." near:x armed robbery near:5 gun
Grouping search terms ( ) (bike or scooter) w/3 (injury or accident)
Expand root word by any number of letters ! liab! yields liable or liability
This case cites:
This case is cited by:

Noll v. Ashland Oil Inc.

1992 | Cited 0 times | Sixth Circuit | May 20, 1992

Order

The plaintiff is appealing a December 16, 1991, agreed entry granting judgment for the defendants on its counterclaims. The defendants now move to dismiss for lack of appellate jurisdiction. The plaintiff has not filed a response. Upon review and consideration, the court concludes that that the December 16 order can not be appealed. See Laczay v. Ross Adhesives, A Div. of Conros Corp., 855 F.2d 351, 354 (6th Cir. 1988) cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1014 (1989); Coughlin v. Regan, 768 F.2d 468 (1st Cir. 1985).

It is therefore Ordered that the motion to dismiss is granted.

Back to top