Search for: "United States v. Mark"
Results 2041 - 2060
of 9,477
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Nov 2017, 4:02 am
The first was Oil States Energy Services v. [read post]
23 Mar 2018, 4:16 am
” At National Review, Mark Rienzi maintains that at the oral argument this week in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 6:43 am
Animal lovers will be relieved to hear that, despite Ron and Doby engaging in a little wrestling, the American Humane Association (AHA) stated in the film’s credits that:“No Animals Were Harmed In The Making Of This FilmTM”This post examines whether trade mark rights can be claimed in slogans and considers the AHA's prospects of success in registering this one in the United Kingdom or elsewhere in the European Union.Can trade mark rights be… [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 12:34 pm
United States, No. 11-182 (June 25, 2012). [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 9:18 pm
See United States v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 10:13 am
’ United States v. [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 9:53 am
United States after the jump. [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 9:40 am
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) applied this provision when it refused Steve Elster’s application to register the phrase “Trump Too Small” as a trademark for shirts. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 8:13 am
The complaint asserts that since Red Bull's introduction in 1996, over four billion units have been sold in the United States and over one billion dollars have been spent on advertising, marketing and promoting the Red Bull energy drink. [read post]
28 Jan 2020, 3:44 am
”Ricardo Media Inc. v. [read post]
8 May 2017, 6:34 am
Is there any way that Bayer v. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 7:17 pm
United States, No. 08-108, at this link. [read post]
5 Jul 2007, 9:42 pm
It claims to own federal registrations for REPORT: for women’s shoes, REPORT for women’s and girls’ footwear, and ONE ON 1 BY REPORT for women’s and children’s fashion shoes.Topline alleges defendants first introduced their women’s apparel line in the United States at a trade show in September 2006, and have only manufactured and sold a limited number of women’s goods in the U.S. under these… [read post]
7 Jan 2010, 1:17 pm
Wyeth v. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 11:16 am
United Fabricare Supply, Inc. v. 3Hanger Supply Company, Inc., 2012 WL 2449916 (C.D. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 2:54 am
"(4) A trade mark shall not be registered if, or to the extent that, its use in the United Kingdom is liable to be prevented— (a) by virtue of any rule of law (in particular, the law of passing off) protecting an unregistered trade mark or other sign used in the course of trade, or … A person thus entitled to prevent the use of a trade mark is referred to in this Act as the proprietor of an 'earlier right' in relation to the trade… [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 4:23 am
The first is United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2009, 2:46 am
car estandar, an unrefined sugar, which is not brown sugar, as commonly understood in the United States. [read post]
13 Feb 2011, 9:49 am
Kudos to Mark Thoma for his injection of a bracing note of clarity into the debate over what we get v. what we pay in "social welfare" taxes. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 10:00 am
[27] One main factor of consideration is whether or not the foreign manufacturer has assigned United States trademark rights and their registration to the designated exclusive United States importer.[28] United States and international antitrust and free competition policies intersect with trademark law in that the designated United States importer is usually concerned with gray market goods because they are sold for less,… [read post]
