Search for: "Mark v. Wish"
Results 21 - 40
of 2,156
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Oct 2013, 9:21 am
Well, another day -- another group: this time it's Wishbone Ash and the dispute goes by the name of Powell v Turner [2013] EWHC 3242 (IPEC), an Intellectual Property Enterprise Court decision of Mr Recorder Douglas Campbell, sitting as an Enterprise Judge on 24 October. [read post]
1 May 2016, 12:08 am
Account of profits in trade mark infringement and passing off cases? [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 8:46 pm
Chocolaterie Guylian N.V. v Registrar of Trade Marks [2009] FCA 891 '); //--> [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 4:43 am
His decision in People v. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 4:41 am
Mark Bennett, before the Georgia Supreme Court. [read post]
26 May 2023, 11:22 am
This case marks a decided victory for the Sacketts, an Idaho couple who wished to build a house on property the EPA found to contain federal wetlands. [read post]
18 May 2014, 9:04 pm
Canadian law at present requires that foreign applicants who wish to register based on a home registration, must have used the trade mark somewhere before they are permitted to apply validly to register the same trade mark in Canada. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 9:09 am
At her Althouse blog, Ann Althouse observed that yesterday, Dec. 12, marked the 10-year anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 7:21 am
Original Rex, L.L.C. v. [read post]
17 Jul 2018, 4:00 am
The Facts At issue in Steam Whistle Brewing Inc v Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission was the AGLC’s mark-up regime on beer. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 11:35 am
S. ___, ___ (2012) (slip op., at 6) (internal quotation marks omitted).Sturgeon v. [read post]
10 Oct 2021, 8:42 pm
The New York Times reported on the filing of House’s lawsuit against Mark Twain on January 27, 1890The “stolen ideas” lawsuit, captioned House v. [read post]
26 Oct 2015, 5:30 am
EMC’s argument was that the goods at issue are intended for a consumer who, since he has a medical problem or wishes to protect his teeth, chooses a product with therapeutic properties. [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 2:48 pm
This decision will determine issues regarding government power to regulate speech, the fate of hundreds of disparaging marks that applicants wish to register, as well as determine the future of past marks that have already been cancelled due to their immoral, scandalous, or deceptive manner. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 7:25 am
International Order of Job's Daughters v. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 7:25 am
International Order of Job's Daughters v. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 1:01 am
Patel v. [read post]
21 May 2010, 3:19 am
Before I consider why in detail – and both because EU trade mark law is currently being reviewed by the Max Planck Institute at the request of the Commission and the Commission itself considers that the Court should reconsider its opinion in the instant very case (see [18] of Interflora v Marks & Spencers No. 2, [2010] EWHC 925 (Ch) [noted by the IPKat here] per Arnold J – I wish to say why I regret those answers.8. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 7:18 pm
McCullough v. [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 5:56 am
He sent me the following comment for posting:I wish the T.T.A.B. would stop saying that dilution of a mark can be shown merely by proving that the challenged mark causes people to think of the famous mark. [read post]
