Search for: "John Good"
Results 2861 - 2880
of 33,320
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Mar 2017, 3:50 am
Discuss among yourselves.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 3:56 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 3:05 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 3:08 am
Better yet, there should be a new refusal: Section 2(t): mere triteness.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
27 Feb 2013, 3:30 am
However, considering the amended description, the Board found no likelihood of confusion.And so the Board granted the motion to amend and dismissed the opposition.Read comments and post your comment here.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 3:45 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 4:01 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 3:26 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
3 Nov 2017, 3:47 am
After a few glasses, definitely.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
23 Feb 2021, 4:19 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
24 Jun 2015, 3:08 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
7 Nov 2018, 5:55 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
27 Sep 2018, 2:46 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 3:28 am
Applicant was allowed two months to submit an appropriate disclaimer.Read comments and post your comment here.TTABlog comment: Text Copyright John L. [read post]
26 Feb 2014, 3:33 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:14 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
8 Jun 2018, 2:39 am
In re DPC Pet Specialties LLC, Serial No. 86951910 (June 6, 2018) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Linda Kuczma).The Goods: Because the goods are in part identical, those overlapping goods must be presumed to travel through the same, normal channels of trade to the same classes of purchasers. [read post]
2 Aug 2022, 3:32 am
That's an affirmance rate of 94.5%, a bit higher than usual.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 4:03 am
Moreover, the Board observed (in blatant dictum), that even assuming arguendo that this shipment occurred before the filing date, no actual finished products were shipped, and even if finished products (or all necessary parts) had been shipped, such shipment from a manufacturer to the owner of the mark is merely a delivery of goods to the trademark owner in preparation for offering the goods for sale, and is not a bona fide use of the mark in commerce.The Board therefore granted… [read post]
14 Apr 2016, 3:38 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
