Search for: "John Doe, Inc."
Results 5481 - 5500
of 5,557
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jan 2007, 7:04 am
Tyson Foods, Inc. (06-706). [read post]
21 Jan 2007, 3:15 pm
Stickley, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2007, 6:12 pm
"In sum, the Board affirmed the refusal to register.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
18 Jan 2007, 1:48 pm
State of Indiana (NFP) John Hill v. [read post]
17 Jan 2007, 7:54 pm
John thinks that GAMESTUDIO is descriptive. [read post]
16 Jan 2007, 10:56 pm
 Chandler does make a valid point in his post titled "UPDATE on Cisco’s iPhone Trademark" where he says the following: At MacWorld, Apple discussed the patents pending on their new phone technology. [read post]
10 Jan 2007, 2:14 pm
Brokers, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 9:08 am
Law Judge John H. [read post]
8 Jan 2007, 4:40 pm
Tellabs, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jan 2007, 9:04 am
Law Judge John J. [read post]
2 Jan 2007, 5:47 am
HA, Inc. where the plaintiff was a patron in the defendant's bar. [read post]
1 Jan 2007, 6:12 pm
See, e.g., In re Ennco Display Systems, Inc., 56 USPQ2d 1279, 1283 (TTAB 2000).Text Copyright John L. [read post]
28 Dec 2006, 2:19 am
SUGARLAND ENTERPRISES, INC., a Wyoming corporation, d/b/a Holiday Inn Citation: 2006 WY 160 Docket Number: 06-20 Appeal from the District Court of Sheridan County, The Honorable John C. [read post]
27 Dec 2006, 9:42 pm
Yet, this does not surprise me because: On Wall Street, crime pays! [read post]
27 Dec 2006, 5:14 pm
"The Board therefore affirmed the refusal to register.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
27 Dec 2006, 1:14 pm
State of Indiana (NFP) John McDowell v. [read post]
22 Dec 2006, 12:11 am
DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKCivil PracticeDespite Claims of 'Distressing' Nature, Plaintiffs Cannot Sue as 'Does,' Must Be Named on Caption Doe v. [read post]
21 Dec 2006, 6:12 pm
"The Board therefore dismissed the oppositionText Copyright John L. [read post]
18 Dec 2006, 4:41 am
Commc'ns Workers of Am., 475 U.S. 643, 649, 106 S.Ct. 1415, 89 L.Ed.2d 648 (1986))); John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2006, 3:12 pm
Applicant lamely contended that "'LOV' does not sound like 'LOVE' as the 'O' in 'LOVE' is pronounced as 'luv' (having a short 'U' sound) and the 'O' in 'LOV' has a short 'O' vowel sound ... and 'JOY' does not sound like 'JOI.'" The Board was not in love with that argument, and its response gave little joy to Applicant. [read post]
