Search for: "Mark May"
Results 2621 - 2640
of 64,935
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jun 2011, 3:18 am
Fla. 2008) (“The party that first uses a mark, develops common law trademark rights that are, or may be, superior to the rights acquired by a later registrant of the mark. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 3:23 am
The Board, however, pointed out that goods may be related for Section 2(d) purposes even if not identical, and regardless of whether they are displayed together or far apart in the same store. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 2:51 am
In the Court's view:Scope of protection for Community collective marks and their essential function* It cannot be inferred that Community collective marks, including those consisting of an indication which may serve to designate the geographical origin of the goods covered, have a different essential function from Community individual marks (which is to distinguish the goods or services of the specific body which is the proprietor of the mark from… [read post]
24 Sep 2010, 12:08 pm
However, the courts have not yet resolved the issue, and it may take years for them to do so. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 2:17 am
Advisers may act more cautiously or ask for an indemnity. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 1:37 pm
In my case note on Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit (UK) Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 303 (29 March 2011) of 2 April 2011 in this blog and in my note on Schutz (UK) Ltd and Another v Delta Containers Ltd and Another [2011] EWHC 1173 (Pat) (5 May 2011) in IP North West I referred to the practice of cross-bottling. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 4:41 pm
Mark Thompson works on a range of policy-related projects with the Open Society Media Program. [read post]
16 Mar 2018, 3:33 am
With respect to sound, it is well-established that “there is no correct pronunciation of a trademark, and consumers may pronounce a mark differently than intended by the brand owner. [read post]
18 May 2018, 4:03 am
Jersey Boardwalk Franchising Co., Opposition No. 91219067and Cancellation No. 92059657 (May 15, 2008) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cynthia C. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 3:53 am
In what may be the first opinion written by recently appointed Judge Jonathan Hudis, the Board sustained an opposition to register the mark POWER TECHON for, inter alia, electrical power extension cords, finding a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark POWER TECH for "Electric extension cords for use with portable electric hand tools, and sold through retail outlets including hardware, plumbing, electrical, and farm supply stores. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 3:22 am
When "essential and integral subject matter" is missing from the drawing, the mark may not be registered. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 3:54 am
" Its experts testified that the mark not only has niche fame in the luxury watch market, but is well-known among "consumers who may not be able to afford the watch. [read post]
26 Jan 2024, 3:50 am
" The law is clear that only the owner of the mark may file a use-based application for registration; if the entity filing the application is not the owner of the mark as of the filing date, the application is void ab initio. [read post]
17 Dec 2019, 6:40 am
"Applicant's evidence of some 40 third-party registrations failed to show that opposer's mark "is so weak, as used on bearings, that Applicant may register a CRAFT BEARING-formative mark for use on bearing and related goods without engendering source confusion. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 2:57 am
Therefore, Applicant DEQ may make a claim of acquired distinctiveness for that element.As to whether EZ has acquired distinctiveness, the Board pointed to Rule 2.41(b), which provides that "in appropriate cases, ownership of one or more prior registrations on the Principal Register of the same mark may be accepted as prima facie evidence of distinctiveness. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 5:49 am
But there is another sense in which this may be so. [read post]
5 Nov 2006, 1:12 pm
Applicant's goods may have been PHYSICIAN ENDORSED, but its mark was not TTAB-endorsed. [read post]
23 Dec 2015, 3:55 am
A registered mark is presumed valid and use of the mark may become incontestable after five years. [read post]
22 Feb 2015, 9:30 pm
So, it seems the petitioner may not get a second bite at the Nollywood cherry. [read post]
9 May 2024, 5:09 am
” Mark Landler reports for the New York Times. [read post]
