Search for: "Lens.com"
Results 1 - 20
of 63
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jan 2012, 6:36 am
Lens.com, Inc., 2012 WL 113812 (D. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 6:37 am
On August 3, 2012, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in the case Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc. [read post]
18 Jul 2013, 3:10 am
Lens.com, Inc., 2013 WL 3665627 (10th Cir. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 3:34 pm
Lens.com, 2012 WL 113812 (D. [read post]
18 Sep 2012, 11:30 am
The case cite is Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., Case No. 2011-1258 (Fed. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 2:35 am
Lens.com’s customers utilize the website (and thereby the software associated therewith) to avail themselves of Lens.com’s services. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 7:45 am
When 1-800 found that several searches generated paid ads for Lens.com's websites, it concluded that Lens.com had reserved the mark as a keyword. 1-800 sued Lens.com for service-mark infringement. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 5:56 am
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit by contact lens retailer 1-800-Contacts alleging that its trademark was infringed by competitor Lens.com’s search ads. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 1:15 pm
Lens.com, Inc., 2022 WL 1665453, No. 1:18-cv-00407-NG-RLM (E.D.N.Y. [read post]
27 Apr 2007, 5:02 am
In re Lens.com, Inc., Serial No. 78076812 (April 17, 2007) [precedential].Applicant Lens.com, Inc. argued that the term LENS is merely suggestive of its services (LOL - ed.), or if descriptive, that the term has acquired secondary meaning. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 3:01 am
" The Board concluded that all three Lens.com factors support the refusal. [read post]
27 Dec 2018, 10:00 pm
Lens.com, Inc.,722 F.3d 1229 (10th Cir. 2013), LENS.com showed in court over 1,000 initial interest confusion events after 1–800–Contacts bought Google AdWords with the Lens.com trademarks. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 8:37 am
Lens.com appealed via the Federal Circuit. [read post]
19 Jul 2013, 5:06 am
Lens.com, Inc., 2013 WL 3665627 (10th Cir. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 2:00 am
Lens.com and its affiliates had purchased adwords for "1-800 contact lenses" and variations on a theme. [read post]
19 Aug 2018, 9:15 am
The 10th Circuit’s Lens.com ruling governs this case. [read post]
4 Jan 2014, 9:02 am
”” Lens.com, 686 F.3d at 1378. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 1:19 pm
Through the course of the litigation, we learn the following facts: 1-800 Contacts accrued $650k in legal fees pursuing the case and capped its legal fees at $1.1M before it stiffed its law firm. the defendant Lens.com made less than $21 in profits from its competitive keyword ad buys. 1-800 Contacts also tried to attribute to Lens.com keyword ad buys made by Lens.com’s affiliates, a legal argument the court ultimately rejected. 1-800 Contacts had done the same thing… [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 11:44 am
The Board noted that implicit in the Lens.com test is considering consumer perception as well as the consumer’s experience or interaction with the product. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 11:44 am
The Board noted that implicit in the Lens.com test is considering consumer perception as well as the consumer’s experience or interaction with the product. [read post]
