Search for: "Distinctive Brands, Inc."
Results 621 - 640
of 1,242
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2014, 4:12 am
Hearst Holdings Inc & Another v A.V.E.L.A. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 4:45 am
McNeil-P.P.C., Inc., 973 F.2d 1033, 1046 (2d Cir. 1992) (house brands can prevent confusion). [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 5:02 am
Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 9:30 am
The background Hetronic International Inc. makes, sells, and services radio remote controls for construction equipment, which have a distinctive trademark registered in the United States. [read post]
26 Dec 2011, 5:59 pm
Fancaster, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jun 2012, 7:08 am
Warner Brothers Entertainment Inc., 11 Civ. 9436 (ALC) (HBP) (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 7:35 am
Careful what you consent to: Adwords and ArgosArgos Ltd v Argos Systems Inc [2017] EWHC 231(February 2017)Argos is a well-known UK High Street retailer. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 2:47 pm
PF Brands, which might have been separated from their boxes. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 4:03 am
* Trade mark troubles in the Galápagos islandsWe are accustomed to view a brand in positive terms, as a valuable asset of its owner. [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 6:00 am
Never mind that Snapchat’s brand guidelines counsel otherwise, like virtually every other brand guideline known to humans. [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 1:29 pm
The record in Stonestreet lacked any such distinction. [read post]
13 Oct 2014, 9:01 am
At the center of this dispute is the drug that Teva sells under the brand name Copaxone. [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 3:23 am
(Chicago IP Litigation Blog) US Copyright – Lawsuits and strategic steps Hudgens, Vanessa - Hudgens claims copyright in décolletée images of herself (IP Factor) US Trademarks Larry Friedman on the role of Customs in brand protection (Seattle Trademark Lawyer) US Trade Marks – Decisions TTAB precedential no 48: Rejecting asserted ‘newly discovered evidence’, TTAB refuses to set aside judgment: Pramil S.R.L. v Michel Farah (TTABlog)… [read post]
1 Aug 2014, 12:23 am
Remember, Supplemental Registrations cover marks only capable of becoming distinctive and they are toothless in the protection they provide the owner — the Principal Register at the USPTO is the coveted prize reserved for those marks that are distinctive for their associated goods and services. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 2:59 pm
Network Solutions, Inc., 193 F.39 980 (9th Cir. 1997). [read post]
18 Jun 2015, 12:25 pm
From Mattel, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Sep 2010, 12:42 am
Brooks Brothers, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Aug 2016, 12:19 pm
Provide Commerce, Inc., 2016 WL 4074121 (D. [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 6:17 pm
As the court explained: Notwithstanding the undeniable fact of corporate interrelationships (evidenced by, inter alia, the parties’ co-branded credit cards), products in these fields do not compete and do not serve the same purpose. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 8:17 am
IMS Health Inc., — U.S. [read post]
