Search for: "Matter of Mark T."
Results 2001 - 2020
of 14,924
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jan 2021, 4:00 am
For trademarks, a comparison of 2020 to 2019 shows a reduction in marks being filed between March and May. [read post]
14 Feb 2022, 9:10 am
The metaverse is coming, was her message, and you haven’t packed your go bag yet? [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 6:24 am
This also entitled A&F to judgment as a matter of law. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 10:21 am
Thus, “Where an advertisement does not incorporate the plaintiff’s trademark, there is no likelihood of confusion as a matter of law” (cites to 1-800 Contacts v. [read post]
25 Sep 2010, 5:06 am
For patent law matters, Hiltzik quotes Mark Lemley (the guy who said Gary Boone invented the integrated circuit):"This is a patent troll-style lawsuit," Mark A. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 7:14 am
Another set of research is about reputation: consequences to mark owner if people think there’s a relationship—TM assumes this will happen as a matter of course but empirical literature tells us it happens rarely, and only with very related goods. [read post]
17 Mar 2023, 3:11 am
LV were able to establish that they have educated the public in areas of the EU, but they weren’t able to evidence this in all nations of the Union. [read post]
16 Sep 2012, 8:03 pm
by Mark I. [read post]
28 Aug 2013, 1:20 pm
Materiality looks to whether a reasonable person would be expected to rely on a matter in making a purchase decision. [read post]
16 Sep 2008, 10:30 am
"The Board observed that "a necessary prerequisite to the establishment of rights in, and the registration of, a term as a trademark is that the subject matter to which the term is applied must be goods. *** [I]ncidental items that an applicant uses in conducting its business (such as letterhead, invoices and business forms), as opposed to items sold and transported in commerce for use by others, are not 'goods in trade.'"Moreover, simply affixing a mark to… [read post]
19 Apr 2008, 6:24 am
" It is appropriate in such a case for the PTO to issue an ornamental refusal if the proposed mark is decorative or ornamental on its face.The Board therefore found that the proposed marks constituted mere ornamentation and failed to function as trademarks.TTABlog comment: Curiously, there was no discussion, or even mention, of the CAFC's decision in In re Slokevage, 78 USPQ2d 1395 (Fed. [read post]
5 Jun 2024, 3:07 am
“ (“Don’t you have a home? [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 2:24 am
Or Mark. [read post]
23 May 2018, 5:04 pm
– Don’t tailgate. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 1:40 pm
Lexis 52397, at *16 (citation and quotation marks omitted).The court in Wimble didn’t dispute that item one (an FDCA violation being “necessary”) and item two (the violation being “actually disputed”) are met in post-Riegel PMA preemption cases. [read post]
31 Jul 2015, 11:36 am
Mark, No. 13-10579 (7-31-15)(Friedland and Murguia; concurrence by McKeown). [read post]
7 Mar 2023, 4:02 am
TTABlogger comment: At least it wasn't another "key aspect" case. [read post]
19 Nov 2012, 4:47 am
mark and was liable for significant damages. [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 5:52 am
The decision marks a return to "longstanding principles" and "independent-contractor analysis will be guided by a list of common-law factors. [read post]
24 Nov 2019, 9:00 pm
It doesn't matter whose dog it is—if the attack leads to injuries, you may be entitled to compensation for medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering.California’s Strict Liability Dog Bite LawUnder California dog bite laws, an individual is directly liable if his animal bites you and causes injuries. [read post]
