Search for: "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK" Results 3101 - 3120 of 7,223
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Feb 2016, 1:46 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
” (citation omitted)).The case: Appeal from the United States Patent and TrademarkOffice, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 95/002,241. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 7:49 pm
  As such, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment and remanded the case back to the district court to instruct the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to enter a disclaimer of the term “THE RAT PACK” on TRP’s trademark registration for ““THE RAT PACK IS BACK. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 2:34 pm by Gregory Winsky
Greg’s own inventions have been awarded four United States patents and are covered by a number of pending domestic and foreign patent applications. [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 9:20 am by Dennis Crouch
Lee, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 15-326 I/P Engine, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 12:55 pm by Peter Harter
Since the American Invents Act (AIA) in 2011, we now have a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) within the United States Patent and Trademark Office. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 12:55 pm by Peter Harter
Since the American Invents Act (AIA) in 2011, we now have a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) within the United States Patent and Trademark Office. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 10:00 pm
To obtain a patent, there is a (usually) lengthy and expensive application and prosecution process that occurs with the United State Patent and Trademark Office. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 1:32 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
United States, 522 F.3d 937, 940 (9th Cir. 2008); see United States v. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 4:00 am by Barry Sookman
Hungary, Intermediary liability https://t.co/T2vEgFvkmx -> Wait… Did you say jail time for trademark infringement? [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 12:12 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
The United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) granted the IPR petition filed by adidas AG (Adidas) and instituted inter partes review of claims 1–46 of the ’011 patent. [read post]
10 Feb 2016, 1:20 am by Jani Ihalainen
One still has to appreciate that the copyright holder can at any time reassert their rights, and thus the copyright in the works is newly resurrected (although, as evident from the above, was never gone to begin with).Our cousins in the United States do accept the abandonment of copyrights in works. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 7:50 pm by Frank Knizner
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) recently affirmed the refusal to register the mark THCTEA, holding that it is “deceptively misdescriptive” when used in connection with tea-based beverages. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 1:44 pm by Ron Coleman
Both the Slog and blog Citizen Rain have pointed out that the coffee giant’s trademark inquiry has been terminated on the United States Patent and Trademark Office Web site. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 8:57 am by Dennis Crouch
Lee, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 15-326 I/P Engine, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 7:24 am by Gene Quinn
On Wednesday, January 20, 2016, I had the opportunity to go on the record with Michelle Lee, who is Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 8:50 am by Marie-Helene Rochon
Le 11 janvier 2016, le United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) a déclaré une interférence entre les deux groupes, c. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 8:33 am by Gene Quinn
On Friday, January 15, 2016, the United States Supreme Court accepted the petitioner’s request to hear Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 7:03 am by Michael Geist
After all, Canada has aligned its laws with the United States both directly and indirectly in several international treaties over the past three decades, and our innovation performance always faltered thereafter. [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 1:33 pm by Nikki Siesel
Another general rule often cited by Examining Attorneys at the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) is that by merely adding or deleting a house mark or other term that is suggestive or descriptive of the goods or services, will not avoid a finding that the marks are confusingly similar. [read post]