Search for: "In re TM"
Results 201 - 220
of 1,022
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jun 2019, 11:01 am
Particularly notable in TM: “if value, then right. [read post]
13 Jun 2019, 11:32 am
I feel that this limit on prior art makes sense if and only if we are confining design patents to truly ornamental designs—once we’re getting to even semi-functional designs, prior art on attaching things to one another seems relevant. [read post]
9 May 2019, 10:49 am
In re E.I. [read post]
8 May 2019, 7:14 am
Genus Lifesciences Inc. v. [read post]
6 May 2019, 7:52 am
If you’re looking for a $25 grill, nobody cares it’s called Backyard. [read post]
3 May 2019, 1:43 pm
A: I’m not saying that we’re smarter than them. [read post]
3 May 2019, 9:49 am
TM—maybe different. [read post]
3 May 2019, 8:32 am
A: in some settings we don’t care: we’re trying to evaluate a market solution. [read post]
1 May 2019, 11:30 pm
One cause is perhaps a little circular: because designs are less well known less people file them than TMs and patents and therefore they receive less attention. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 11:44 pm
Hot on the heels of last month’s 2019 edition of the Retromark conference, reviewed here, comes the fifth (how times flies) edition of Darren Meale of Simmons & Simmons’ Retromark rundown of notable trade mark cases over the past six months. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 6:22 am
In particular, TM can resist importation from other doctrines by contesting how much definitions even matter. [read post]
12 Apr 2019, 2:50 pm
TM law says that if people think both would produce, then they’re in the same market. [read post]
12 Apr 2019, 1:43 pm
So we get the idea that we’re concerned w/TMs as they exist in the market, and we need to be skeptical about any rule that sees registration as a thing in itself. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 8:10 am
In re Siny Corp. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 3:05 pm
We’re happy to see recording revenues starting to rise again, but they’re nowhere near their peak in inflation adjusted dollars. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 8:21 am
[I gotta say, it seems to me that the court is requiring the plaintiff to quantify its damages to receive the defendant’s profits, which is not the standard in other situations—one reason I thought we had disgorgement was to deal with the inequitable situation in which we’re sure the plaintiff was harmed, but not sure enough how much it was harmed to award a dollar amount of its damages. [read post]
28 Feb 2019, 5:42 am
In TM v. [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 1:49 pm
Judge © and TM claims. [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 12:42 pm
Assume you’re in-house at Delta Airlines. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 8:07 am
Tempnology said, we’re not going to fill that order. . . . [read post]
