Search for: "mark"
Results 6241 - 6260
of 135,923
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jan 2009, 7:24 am
MARK STEYN: Our Permanent State of Routine Emergency. [read post]
21 Apr 2017, 2:17 am
The Marks: Not surprisingly, the Board found the marks to be similar in sound, appearance, and meaning, and very similar in overall commercial impression. [read post]
10 Aug 2021, 3:38 am
" Comparing the marks, the Board noted that there is no per se rule that when an applicant incorporates the whole of the cited mark, the marks must be found to be similar. [read post]
14 Oct 2020, 3:23 am
[Section 2(d) refusal of the mark shown immediately below, for "restaurant services" in view of the registered mark HOLY COW! [read post]
7 Nov 2018, 5:55 am
" Although applicant's mark begins with MISEL, and the first word in a mark is the portion that consumers notice first [DUH! [read post]
8 Jun 2018, 2:39 am
The USPTO refused registration of the mark SAVORY ROASTERS for "pet food; pet treats" [SAVORY disclaimed], deeming the mark likely to cause confusion with the registered mark HEARTY ROASTERS for "pet food. [read post]
18 Nov 2016, 8:06 am
It is completely consistent with §43(c) that dilution protection could be available for a registrable but unregistered mark but not for an unregistrable mark. [read post]
14 Nov 2024, 4:43 am
Applicant argued that, in the cited mark, BLACK AGAVE will be seen as a reference to the plant, whereas in its mark, the word BLACK would be seen as a laudatory term, as in Johnnie Walker "Black Label. [read post]
17 Nov 2016, 4:33 am
But what about the marks? [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 3:00 am
" As to the cited mark, applicant contended, "it can only be assumed that the ... mark was used to attract those seeking Buddhism based yoga and QiGong classes. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 2:56 am
Moreover, when the goods are identical, a lesser degree of similarity between the marks is necessary to support a finding of likely confusion.Because both marks include the the designation BARTON, the marks are similar in appearance and pronunciation. [read post]
31 Mar 2016, 8:00 am
Aquasol Corp. first explained that when two companies seek to protect the same mark priority is determined by the first to appropriate and use the mark in commerce so long as there is an intention to make continued use of the mark. [read post]
25 Sep 2014, 3:31 pm
In the UK, non-use of a trade mark for an uninterrupted 5 years, without any proper reason, allows anyone to apply to have the trade mark revoked. [read post]
6 Nov 2019, 7:04 am
"[T]he mark must be a substantially an exact representation of the mark as used on or in connection with the goods. [read post]
17 Aug 2018, 4:10 am
The Board affirmed a Section 2(d) refusal to register the mark COLORGANICS for various hair care products, finding the mark likely to cause confusion with the registered marks KOLORGANICS and KOLORGANIQUE for various make-up products. [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 9:48 pm
The conditions to be endorsed against the registration of the mark are that: "The registration of this mark shall give no right to the exclusive use of the word “clear” and “view “separately and apart from the mark; and The trademark registrant admits that the registration of this mark shall not debar others from the bona fide descriptive use in the course of trade of the words “clear view” and… [read post]
10 Feb 2009, 4:15 am
Secondly, the figures were not divided out for each mark. [read post]
18 Oct 2024, 11:13 am
There is no dilution claim for associating one marked product with a differently marked product. [read post]
31 May 2020, 3:37 pm
Another week, another English High Court decision in a long-running trade mark dispute. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 2:38 am
The Board sustained an opposition to registration of the slogan REMEMBER THIS NAME for legal services on the ground that the phrase does not function as a service mark. [read post]
