Search for: "Mark C. Good"
Results 561 - 580
of 5,942
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jan 2016, 3:43 am
The IPKat has learnt of a reference to the CJEU (Case C-654/15) from the Swedish Supreme Court (its case no. [read post]
13 Feb 2019, 11:33 pm
LouboutinsFollowing two Opinions of Advocate General (AG) Szpunar [here and here], the CJEU saga of the Louboutin red sole trade mark came to an end last June with the decision in C-163/16 [here]. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 3:04 am
In re C G Asset Management Pty Ltd, Serial No. 87033933 (December 15, 2017) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Anthony R. [read post]
21 Jan 2021, 3:46 am
[Section 2(d) refusal of the mark shown below for “coconut and chocolate confections; cookies; chocolates; chocolate snacks; baked goods, namely, cookies, chocolate-based bakery goods, and coconut-based bakery goods" in view of the registered mark THE TASTE OF PARADISE for "processed macadamia nuts. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 3:36 am
When are goods supposed to be for personal use and when should they be assumed to be used in the course of trade under trade mark law? [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 11:00 am
C.'s affirmative defense of laches, the Board dismissed a petition for cancellation of the mark BRAIDED ACCENTS & Design ["BRAIDED" and the pictorial representation of a braid disclaimed] for moldings, door frames, window frames, rails and wainscotting. [read post]
5 Nov 2013, 7:13 am
The KVH service mark was abandoned, while the KVH trade mark was registered 2011. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 4:51 am
In other words, if you are registering signs that are used like collective marks as individual marks, you risk losing your mark for lack of use after the five year non-use period. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 1:42 pm
Code § 24-5-0.5-3(a)(7) API asks for an injunction; damages of $1,000,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods sold; the court to order the seizure of Bullseye's counterfeit goods, packaging and related items; the destruction of goods bearing infringing marks; corrective notification to purchasers of Bullseye's goods; treble damages; and attorneys' fees. [read post]
12 May 2015, 1:53 am
The situation is stronger in respect of the opponents' [logo mark] in that the goods are identical and the marks have a degree of similarity such that the average consumer would be directly confused. [read post]
22 Jul 2016, 4:27 am
“The producers of communicative goods often embed their marks not only on the packaging of the good but in its content. [read post]
28 Aug 2013, 7:02 am
The fifth Justice in the Walker majority, Tom C. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 8:22 am
Federal trademark law allows for the registration of trademarks, which provides certain benefits: Registration on the principal register (1) "serves as 'constructive notice of the registrant's claim of ownership' of the mark"; (2) "is 'prima facie evidence of the validity of the registered mark and of the registration of the mark, of the owner's ownership of the mark, and of the owner's exclusive right to use the… [read post]
21 May 2021, 11:00 am
Indeed, Banksy freely chose to confirm online prior to the registration of the contested mark that he did not produce any goods. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 3:12 pm
§1125(c)(3)(A)(i). [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 9:58 am
So, when it comes to reputed trade marks the extended protection is actionable whenever the relevant public "makes a connection between those marks" or "establishes a link between them" [see CJEU case law in Ferrero v OHMI, C‑552/09 P, Adidas-Salomon and Adidas Benelux, C‑408/01, and Intel Corporation, C-252/07]. [read post]
15 May 2007, 1:41 pm
For the purposes of Art. 4(4)(a) of the First Council Directive 89/104 of 21 December 1988, where:(a) the earlier mark has a huge reputation for certain specific types of goods or services,(b) those goods or services are dissimilar or dissimilar to a substantial degree to the goods or services of the later mark,(c) the earlier mark is unique in respect of any goods or services, (d) the earlier mark would be brought to… [read post]
5 Sep 2014, 2:32 am
Moreover, as examining attorney C. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 12:07 am
"And so the Board dismissed BVD's Section 43(c) claim as well.TTABlog comment: I think this decision should be precedential, at least for the discussion of judicial notice. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 9:00 am
The judge held that the defence of statutory acquiescence raised by the Defendants under section 48 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA 1994), could not succeed because the five year period only starts to run when the earlier trade mark owner has knowledge of both the use of the later trade mark, and of its registration (applying Case C-482/09, Budejovický Budvar np v Anheuser-Busch Inc [2011] ECR I-08701). [read post]
