Search for: "Mark Case"
Results 4201 - 4220
of 70,948
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Sep 2010, 9:00 am
Such is not the case here in California because California is a no-fault divorce State. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 10:10 pm
link1 of Mark Wahlberg's victims says he shouldn't be pardonedBy PHILIP MARCELO and RODRIQUE NGOWI11 hours ago.BOSTON (AP) — A victim of one of Mark Wahlberg's racially motivated attacks as a teenage delinquent in segregated Boston in the 1980s insists he shouldn't be granted a pardon for his crimes.Kristyn Atwood was among a group of mostly black fourth-grade students on a field trip to the beach in 1986 when Wahlberg and his white friends began… [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 2:42 am
Applicant submitted numerous third-party website pages listings a "wide variety of jewelry items consistently described as 'Stirrup Jewelry'; in each case, the item is in the shape of an equestrian stirrup. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 10:24 pm
In any case, "the presence or absence of a hyphen is hardly sufficient under these circumstances to distinguish the marks. [read post]
25 Nov 2009, 12:48 pm
But then I ran into Judge Easterbrook’s opinion in the McDonald case, and noticed he seems to use the British rule. [read post]
15 May 2020, 5:46 am
” A jury ruled against Lucky Brand, but litigation began yet again in 2011, with Marcel Fashion alleging that Lucky Brand was still using the “Get Lucky” mark. [read post]
17 Nov 2021, 8:25 am
Interestingly, the court noted that while this case was a classic right of publicity case, plaintiffs turned it into a false endorsement case in “a blatant effort to federalize a state law claim” in order to extend the reach to people with no rights under New York law. [read post]
17 Nov 2021, 8:25 am
Interestingly, the court noted that while this case was a classic right of publicity case, plaintiffs turned it into a false endorsement case in “a blatant effort to federalize a state law claim” in order to extend the reach to people with no rights under New York law. [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 10:24 pm
" Kellogg failed to rebut General Mills' prima facie case of acquired distinctiveness based on transfer of the acquired distinctiveness of the identical mark for breakfast cereal. [read post]
14 Jul 2015, 3:13 am
" In re Strategic Partners Inc., 102 USPQ2d 1397, 1399 (TTAB 2012).The facts in this case were unusual. [read post]
28 Oct 2015, 2:30 am
Luckily, the European Court of Justice answered this question over a month ago.The case of Iron & Smith v Unilever dealt with a national application for the mark "be Impulsive" in Hungary, lodged by Iron & Smith. [read post]
10 Oct 2019, 10:00 pm
As such, the trademark does not have to be confined one physical object, see In re Trade-mark Cases, 100 U.S. 82 (1879). [read post]
12 Jun 2018, 9:57 am
Whether this omission will be challenged in future case law remains to be seen. [read post]
12 Jun 2018, 9:57 am
Whether this omission will be challenged in future case law remains to be seen. [read post]
30 Jan 2023, 8:24 am
Accepting bad faith in such a case shows how broad this concept is in its application. [read post]
10 Oct 2023, 5:19 am
We apply this reverse presumption to the facts of this case, and find the market interface factor weighs slightly in favor of a finding of likelihood of confusion, to the extent the parties acknowledged a need for Applicant to choose a non-confusingly similar mark per APA § 19.5.2. [read post]
28 Jun 2019, 2:30 am
July 11, 2019 - 11 AM: In re My Style S.r.l., Serial No. 86698170 [Section 2(d) refusal of MY STYLE BAGS for handbags luggage, and numerous other class 18 goods, including "Carrying cases for electronic equipment, namely, cell phones and tablet computers" in view of the registered mark "myStyle" (in standard character form) for "Bags and cases specially adapted for holding or carrying portable telephones and telephone equipment and accessories;… [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 9:17 am
“The mark directly conveys an idea: coverage, storage, protection—encapsulation—all of which the cellphone cases provide, according to Uncommon’s registration. [read post]
21 Mar 2014, 6:52 am
The Board found respondent's additional proof inadequate to overcome the prima facie case established by the petitioner. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 7:31 am
In Tam, the Supreme Court reasoned that Section 2(a) embodied restrictions on free speech, in the case of “disparaging” marks, which were clearly unconstitutional. [read post]
