Search for: "Mark C. Good"
Results 601 - 620
of 5,942
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Aug 2020, 5:18 am
" In re Born in the USA LLC, Serial No. 87867549 (August 26, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cynthia C. [read post]
2 Nov 2013, 2:01 pm
The Independent So, Lord Chancellor…everything going to Plan A or Plan B… or Plan C…? [read post]
2 Nov 2013, 2:01 pm
The Independent So, Lord Chancellor…everything going to Plan A or Plan B… or Plan C…? [read post]
16 Sep 2018, 1:41 am
The KitKat trade mark (as reported in the CJEU decision- the photocopier has not been kind)By now, the fate of the four fingered KitKat shape mark is old news - Joined Cases C‑84/17 P, C‑85/17 P and C‑95/17 P Rumours of the mark’s death have been greatly exaggerated - it is now for the EUIPO to reconsider the evidence in light of the CJEU's ruling and reach a decision as to whether or not the mark… [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 8:47 am
In other words, in addition to the price for the imported goods the buyer incurs costs on account of royalty and license fee which the buyer pays to the foreign supplier for using information, patent, trade mark and know how in the manufacture of the licensed product in India. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 3:14 am
In re Cerveceria Primus, S.A. de C.V., Serial No. 87460794 [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge George C. [read post]
21 May 2010, 3:19 am
If a trader cannot (when it is truly the case) say: "my goods are the same as Brand X (a famous registered mark) but half the price", I think there is a real danger that important areas of trade will not be open to proper competition. 17. ... [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 3:17 am
A mark must be considered in the context of the goods or services with which it is used, not in the abstract. [read post]
1 Feb 2023, 6:01 am
David Richards: Honourable senators, I have a good deal of problems with this bill. [read post]
17 Oct 2010, 6:36 pm
C 763 (11th Cir. [read post]
8 Sep 2012, 9:13 am
Mark Houldin has accepted a job with the National Legal Aid and Defender Association (NLADA). [read post]
23 Jul 2021, 2:18 am
In short, MILEY CYRUS was filed for various goods and services in classes lasses 9, 16, 28 and 41 and got an opposition based on a stylized mark CYRUS in classes 20 and 41. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 2:17 pm
It noted once again that when the goods are identical, a lesser degree of similarity is necessary to support a finding of likely confusion.As to the marks, the Board found that "most importantly" the marks are "distinctly different in meaning. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 11:08 am
Then again, this business probably has stronger grounds of opposition under s. 16(3)(a) or even s. 16(3)(c). [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 11:03 am
”Going back to the facts of the case, it is difficult to deny that the marks are at least visually and phonetically similar, whilst they were used in the identical class of goods. [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 10:00 pm
The problem with this plan, however, is that Sections 3(1)(b) and (c) of the UK’s Trade Marks Act 1994 forbid the registration of “trade marks which are devoid of any distinctive character” and “trade marks which consist exclusively of signs or indications which may serve, in trade, to designate the . . . geographical origin . . . of goods or services. [read post]
10 May 2021, 4:35 am
Applicant argued that the transposition of the wording is significant because neither mark gives "any indication as to the goods and/or services they are selling or providing, and the ordering and appearance of the terms thus makes all the difference. [read post]
11 Feb 2021, 4:58 am
Tempting Brands Netherlands B.V., Opposition No. 91233138 (February 5, 2021) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cynthia C. [read post]
28 Jul 2008, 4:46 am
How strange, then, that a matter as fundamental as the right of a shopping centre operator to register its name as a trade mark should have had to wait so long for a definitive ruling. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 10:04 pm
First, with regard to acquiescence, section 48 of the Trade Marks Act of 1994 states the following: “(1) Where the proprietor of an earlier trade mark or other earlier right has acquiesced for a continuous period of five years in the use of a registered trade mark in the United Kingdom, being aware of that use, there shall cease to be any entitlement on the basis of that earlier trade mark or other right— to apply for a declaration… [read post]
