Search for: "Marks v. Howe"
Results 41 - 60
of 14,115
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Mar 2008, 5:00 am
Honda Motor Co., Ltd. v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 3:18 pm
The situation presents an interesting question: how is the opposition likely to be handled? [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 3:34 am
Torrefazione Italia LLC v. [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 2:26 am
To the extent that this approach is appropriate, how to establish it then becomes the question. [read post]
16 May 2024, 5:40 pm
Board'Friday marks the 70th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision "Brown v. [read post]
8 Oct 2022, 11:10 am
Policy Implications Previously, I discussed how the court’s ruling in Humane Society v. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 1:29 am
To see how a bigger entity can use such a procedure against a smaller entity, see the trademark case of Citigroup v. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 3:27 am
Last Friday, the High Court granted special leave to appeal in 2 trade mark matters: Health World Ltd v Shin-Sun Australia Pty Ltd E & J Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Limited Given only about 80 cases a year score this level of achievement, there are obviously big issues afoot. [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 11:12 am
In Taylor v. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 11:44 pm
Hot on the heels of last month’s 2019 edition of the Retromark conference, reviewed here, comes the fifth (how times flies) edition of Darren Meale of Simmons & Simmons’ Retromark rundown of notable trade mark cases over the past six months. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 9:47 am
When dealing with a registered mark – one doesn’t look at how the mark is actually used – one looks at the actual registration. [read post]
10 Dec 2018, 11:00 am
Just how big is the "Monster"? [read post]
17 Jul 2018, 2:18 am
Gucci America, Inc. v. [read post]
12 May 2010, 9:44 pm
” Aycock Engineering, Inc., v. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 1:28 am
Specifically, section 41(1)(c) refers to the registration of a series of trade marks and section.41(2) says that a trade mark means a number of trade marks which resemble each other in a defined way and differ only in particular and limited respects.Kitchin LJ also answered Fox’s question about how the non-use provisions under section 46 should be applied. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 9:30 pm
South African case law that has referred to European decisions that have caused the UKIPO to summarise the Principles as they have been referred to above include Adcock Ingram v Cipla Medpro (Sabel v Puma), Laugh it off Promotions v SAB (Canon v MGM), Puma v Global Warming (Marca Mode v Adidas) and Cowbell v ICS Holdings (Canon v MGM). [read post]
29 Oct 2008, 11:00 am
Anheuser-Busch, Incorporated v. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 3:18 pm
” Marks v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 2:39 pm
Unique Product Solutions, Ltd. v. [read post]
8 Dec 2015, 9:17 am
In Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Limited & Anor, the Supreme Court has given judgments that will not be welcomed by the tenant community. [read post]
