Search for: "State v. L. B. T."
Results 3221 - 3240
of 3,632
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Aug 2009, 11:08 pm
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 10:57 pm
L. [read post]
24 Jul 2009, 1:02 am
This being so, it was a sign, and Kenwood couldn't argue that it wasn't being used as a sign for the purposes of Arts 9(1)(b) and (c). [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 10:00 pm
Generally, practitioners don't read the law reviews. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 2:00 am
CUSTOMS logo barred by sections 2(a) and 2(b): In re Peter S Herrick, PA (TTABlog) TTAB enters judgment on the pleadings against applicant who admitted non-use of its mark Esprit IP Limited v Mellbeck Ltd (not precedential) (TTABlog) WYHA? [read post]
18 Jul 2009, 7:31 am
” B. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 11:33 am
Int'l Gamco v. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 11:11 am
Elle Belle, LLC, Cancellation No. 92042991, 85 USPQ2d 1090 (TTAB Apr. 9, 2007) [precedential]; Hurley Int'l LLC v. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 1:24 am
Salzburg, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 3:39 pm
(See Honda Motor Co. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2009, 5:01 pm
Paul Smith writes at his blog:"[T]he Supreme Court ruled in Morse v. [read post]
4 Jul 2009, 4:50 pm
L. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 11:30 pm
" It noted that Rule 2.112(b) similarly states that "[t]he required fee must be included ... for each class sought to be cancelled. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 10:45 pm
Tip from the TTABlog: Don't Use the Applied-For Mark Descriptively in the Identification of GoodsTTABlog WYHA? [read post]
25 Jun 2009, 8:40 am
T. [read post]
24 Jun 2009, 8:39 am
[State v. [read post]
21 Jun 2009, 3:39 pm
Ms Ryan could pursue breach of s.11 L&T Act 1985 or tenancy agreement, but she could not make the repair effectively a condition of sale. [read post]
21 Jun 2009, 12:01 am
Daniel B. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 5:13 pm
Nat'l Ed. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 1:46 am
Art.5(1)(a) is wider than Art.5(1)(b) [thus confusion isn't required] and while descriptive use, e.g. [read post]
