Search for: "Mark C. Good"
Results 381 - 400
of 5,941
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Oct 2010, 6:00 am
It is so good that the California Labor Code adopted it around 2005 to begin documenting impairments to injured workers throughout California. [read post]
19 Aug 2013, 3:27 am
[That put the kibosh on Opposer's Section 43(c) dilution claim]. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 3:53 am
§ 1125(c). [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 4:00 am
The opponent argued that use in relation to goods required a transfer of property to occur under Section 4 of the Trade-marks Act, RSC 1985, c T-13. [read post]
12 Apr 2019, 1:43 pm
Focusing on defining marks is important b/c multifactor infringement test often zooms back & forth b/t what the mark is in analyzing the different factors. [read post]
9 Aug 2015, 4:01 pm
That largely just repeats the formulation used to explain what the essential function of a trade mark is (Philips, CJEU Case C-299/99). [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 6:21 am
In a 63-page opinion, the Board dismissed Nautica Apparel's Section 2(d) and Section 43(c) claims in this opposition to registration of the mark NAUTICA for "[r]ecreational vehicles, namely, motor homes. [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 8:19 am
This decision concerns the validity of the word trade mark ‘Cinkciarz’ for goods and services in classes 9, 36 and 41 of the Nice classification for, among others, banking and exchanging money services. [read post]
3 Feb 2022, 2:31 pm
Prieto: That’s a good question. [read post]
2 Nov 2019, 2:53 am
It turned to CJEU C-65/12 Leidseplein Beheer [here], where the CJEU established that 'due cause' may also relate to the "subjective interests" of a third party using a trade mark or a similar sign. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 7:20 am
Article 7(1)(b) EUTMRThe Board began by noting that 'distinctive character', for the purposes of Article 7(1)(b) EUTMR means that the mark applied for must 'serve to identify the goods or services for which registration is applied for as originating from a particular undertaking, and thus to distinguish those goods from those of other undertakings' (Vorsprung durch Technik, C-398/08 and others).The 'distinctive character' of a… [read post]
22 Dec 2022, 7:00 am
As a reminder for those who do not live and breathe trade mark law, Article 9(2) is the suite of provisions which entitles EU trade mark owners the right to stop third parties from using any sign which is identical or similar to their trade mark in relation to goods or services that are identical, similar or not similar (with some extra requirements) to those for which the EU trade mark is registered. [read post]
20 Oct 2022, 8:00 pm
In other words, the owner of an EU trade mark can ask for the destruction of goods which were manufactured by the trade mark holder or licensee, but sold in the EEA without consent. [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 2:12 pm
Merpel however wonders what good can come from this decision. [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 11:54 am
"The judge’s interpretation was upheld by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on 1 December 2011 in Joined Cases C-446/09 and C-495/09 [reviewed by the IPKat here].After nearly two years of the EU legislative process, the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the EU agreed, on 10 June 2015, the final compromise text of the Council of the European Union on the proposal for a new EU Regulation on the (to be renamed) EU Trade Mark, which includes… [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 9:00 am
We have a nice student post today on the motion filed by Mark Cuban for attorneys fees against the Commission alleging bad faith in connection with the investigation. [read post]
20 Aug 2015, 1:30 am
In April 2009, roughly a year after the seizure in March 2008, the seized goods were finally released.Diageo brought substantive proceedings for trade mark infringement against Simiramida and was in for the next bad surprise: the City Court of Sofia dismissed the action, holding that Diageo's trade mark rights were exhausted - although the goods had been placed on the market outside of the EEA with Diageo's consent. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 6:36 am
Carried over from a previous case: the burden is on the senior user to provide “proof that the use of the later mark is or would be detrimental to the distinctive character of the earlier mark requires evidence of a change in the economic behaviour of the average consumer of the goods or services for which the earlier mark was registered consequent on the use of the later mark, or evidence of a serious likelihood that such a change will occur… [read post]
Test Your TTAB Judge-Ability: Are BODY FRUIT and FRUIT OF THE LOOM Confusingly Similar for Clothing?
25 May 2012, 5:31 am
However, the Board did find the mark to be strong.The goods: The partial identity of the goods weighed heavily in FOTL's favor. [read post]
18 Apr 2018, 1:49 am
(c) Aurally, the marks have striking phonetic differences at the beginning, which are simple to pronounce and consist of sounds that are familiar to the public in Singapore. [read post]
