Search for: "Mark D Ware"
Results 1 - 20
of 118
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2009, 11:42 pm
Ein Legostein mit der typischen Noppenanordnung auf der Oberseite war vom Deutschen Patent- und Markenamt im Jahre 1996 als dreidimensionale Marke für die Ware “Spielbausteine” eingetragen worden. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 11:02 am
The French version of the directive looks to be referring to trade marks "of repute", which is a different matter - and Article L713-5 of the French Code refers to "une marque jouissant d'une renommée". [read post]
16 Feb 2009, 3:00 am
For example, Official Mark holders enjoy exclusive use of their mark for all wares and services, not needing to file a list of wares and services used in association their marks. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 11:02 am
The French version of the directive looks to be referring to trade marks "of repute", which is a different matter - and Article L713-5 of the French Code refers to "une marque jouissant d'une renommée". [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 2:44 am
Here are three recently decided Section 2(d) cases: one opposition and two appeals. [read post]
5 Feb 2010, 2:19 pm
The Court then went on to find that the marks were contrary to section 10 of the Act (which prohibits adoption as a trade-mark of a mark that has by ordinary commercial usage become recognized as designating the kind, quality, quantity, destination, value, place of origin or date of production of any wares or services), as well as 7(d) of the Act (which prohibits a person from using a description in association with wares or services that… [read post]
26 May 2011, 6:02 pm
The SCC also held that “[c]onsumers of expensive wares or services and owners of associated trade-marks are entitled to trade-mark guidance and protection as much as those acquiring and selling inexpensive wares or services” (Masterpiece at para. 73). 4. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 2:05 pm
To prevail on the ground of likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d) of the Lanham Act, based on a previously used mark, it is the Opposer’s burden to prove both priority of use and likelihood of confusion by a preponderance of the evidence. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 8:19 am
Regal Ware, Inc., et. al., 3-10-cv-00168 (WIWD March 15, 2011, Order) (Conley, J.) [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 4:08 am
" As to the applicant's beverage ware (class 21), the four third-party registrations submitted by Agile, without any evidence regarding use, were insufficient to show relatedness with Agile's services. [read post]
13 Dec 2007, 12:43 pm
In Accessoires D’Autos Nordiques v. [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 3:22 am
In two recent section 2(d) oppositions, the fame of the opposer's marked played a dominant role in the Board's Section 2(d) analysis. [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 2:57 am
Per 37 CFR § 2.142(d), “exhibits attached to a brief that were not made of record during examination are untimely, and will not be considered. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 3:13 am
Mark your diaries ...! [read post]
30 Dec 2014, 7:30 am
Opposer’s crystal wares have won numerous national and international awards and have garnered significant unsolicited media attention. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 5:57 am
Although, like James May, I'd settle for the self-replenishing drinks cabinet. [read post]
29 Sep 2014, 5:49 am
Tacking requires that the earlier mark is “the legal equivalent of the mark in question or indistinguishable therefrom” such that consumers “consider both as the same mark. [read post]
21 Jul 2010, 3:11 pm
Décarie Motors Inc. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 2:00 am
However, Canada Post also appealed to section 9(1)(d) of the Canadian Act, which prohibits marks likely to lead to the belief that the wares in question are sold under Canadian government patronage. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 1:23 pm
Under s. 12(1)(d), a trade-mark is not registrable if it is confusing with another registered trade-mark. [read post]
