Search for: "Matter of Mark T." Results 301 - 320 of 16,071
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2010, 3:18 pm by Don Cruse
In this case, the federal Marks rule wouldn’t shed much light on the Texas Marks case — even if Texas courts had adopted that approach. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 4:15 am
He said that there were "three powerful reasons" why the change in value of the husband's pension did not justify any variation in the percentage figure awarded to the wife (where not within quotation marks, I precis Hess J's words):1. [read post]
4 Apr 2018, 8:04 pm by Dennis Crouch
The brief is certainly not the best ever filed, but it raises important points: Scandalous Marks: The Government incorrectly asserts that the Clause only prohibits registration of marks that contain “profanity, excretory or sexual” matter — despite the plain language of the text. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 8:26 pm
Or, you can email me at, or download any of my FREE Ebooks from this website. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 8:11 am by Dan Bressler
District Court for the Middle District of Florida recommended approving that motion April 20, rejecting the argument that the matters aren’t substantially related. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 1:00 pm by Benjamin Wittes
 I urge any inclined to rush to judgment on this matter to view a reformed military commission hearing on pre-trial motions. [read post]
19 Apr 2015, 4:40 am
Next, the Court referred to settled-case law (Cases T-19/99 Companyline; T-273/10 Olive Line) and affirmed that the use of the term “LINE” in combination with a registered trade mark can be perceived by the public as identifying the product line covered by such mark. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 5:43 am
As Sven Klos remarked, having litigated the same provision of Benelux trade mark law (where the "substantial value" exclusion originates from) for 20 years, he still does not know what it is supposed to mean (and the CJEU's Hauck decision hasn't made this easier, has it). [read post]
9 Dec 2021, 4:45 am by SHG
But the position taken by BLM here, that it doesn’t matter what the evidence is or what the jury decides, isn’t going to get anyone on board. [read post]
13 Dec 2011, 1:40 pm by Shireen Smith
  But as a solicitor who advises SMEs on Internet, and IP matters, including trade mark filings, I am absolutely sure that encouraging SMES to file their own trade marks often doesn’t do them any favours. [read post]
11 Nov 2020, 2:19 am
Trademark Rule 2.72(a)(2) provides that, in a Section 1(a) application, an applicant may amend the drawing of the mark if "[t]he proposed amendment does not materially alter the mark" as depicted in the application drawing. [read post]
12 Aug 2010, 6:58 pm by Peter
” - Mark Twain - If we don’t confiscate all of the wealth of the super rich the deficit will increase next year. [read post]
23 Jan 2017, 9:56 am by Tamera H. Bennett
  Consumers may not, however, perceive larger designs or slogans as trademarks when such matter is prominently displayed across the front of a t-shirt. [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 4:49 pm
So far, I haven’t seen any response to the SEC complaint on his sites, but I’m guessing that’s only a matter of time. [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 1:17 am by Jani Ihalainen
Cadbury challenged the registration, seeking to invalidate it, with the matter ending up with the CJEU 11 years later.The case revolves around Article 52(2) of the CTM Regulation, which allows for the registration of marks that have acquired distinctiveness through the use of the mark in conjunction with the goods or services. [read post]