Search for: "In re Application of Johns"
Results 581 - 600
of 6,576
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 May 2018, 4:33 am
Applicant argued, without success, that Leiper's Fork is "an obscure location which, even if the public were aware existed, would not have led them to believe Applicant's Goods originate there. [read post]
21 Dec 2012, 4:02 am
In re Topson Downs of California, Inc., Serial No. 85067696 (December 4, 2012) [not precedential]. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 3:19 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
17 Oct 2022, 3:51 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
27 Apr 2021, 5:24 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 5:26 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
28 Oct 2016, 11:41 am
John Welch reports a TTAB decision upholding the denial of a trademark application for machine chain supported by a specimen of use depicting the mark in a catalog. [read post]
16 Jan 2007, 5:13 pm
It therefore affirmed the refusal under Section 2(e)(5).Text Copyright John L. [read post]
20 May 2022, 3:09 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 7:49 am
In re Herschend Adventure Holdings, LLC, Serial No. 87562135 (January 15, 2019) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Susan J. [read post]
11 May 2018, 3:17 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 11:39 am
Chief Justice John Roberts began by questioning whether the application of state law in this case was really “neutral” in light of the result, which he characterized as “authoriz[ing] a type of arbitration that is … like a poison pill that [we] basically said in prior cases is fundamentally inconsistent with arbitration. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 2:31 am
In re Corporate Fuel Partners, LLC, Serial No. 78705685 (August 27, 2010) [not precedential].The Examining Attorney maintained that the term CORPORATE "describes the intended users of applicant. [read post]
24 Oct 2007, 4:39 am
It is black letter law that even if Applicant is the first and/or only user of the term, that does not mean the term is not descriptive of the goods and services.The Board therefore affirmed the refusal to register.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
19 Jul 2007, 5:12 am
"Therefore the Board found confusion likely and affirmed the 2(d) refusal.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
19 May 2011, 2:25 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 3:27 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 2:18 am
Text Copyright John L. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 2:38 am
In re Kumho Tire Co., Serial No. 77377089 (November 12, 2010) [not precedential].Applicant contended that PLATINUM is a weak mark because the term is laudatory and therefore entitled to a limited scope of protection; that ECSTA is the dominant portion of its mark; and that the ECSTA LX portion is sufficient to distinguish the marks. [read post]
2 Oct 2018, 8:55 am
"Text Copyright John L. [read post]
