Search for: "Mark"
Results 6821 - 6840
of 147,987
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2016, 3:48 am
The goods are identical, but what about the marks? [read post]
15 Jul 2016, 8:33 am
(That's a monopoly on the word as a mark.) [read post]
12 May 2022, 3:55 am
" The purported mark is molded into the bottom of applicant's water bottles (see photo below right) and there was no evidence that purchasers would encounter the mark and perceive it as a source indicator. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 3:12 am
Well, the goods overlap, but what about the marks? [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 3:10 am
The drawing of the mark was found to not be a substantially exact representation of the mark as depicted in the original specimen, and both specimens failed to show the applied-for mark in use for the identified goods. [read post]
17 Dec 2019, 6:40 am
" Therefore the Board rejected its claim.Opposer relied on its use of its mark CRAFT BEARING COMPANY since 1994, but applicant maintained that the mark is generic or merely descriptive. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 2:52 am
The Board noted that Applicant's standard character mark might be used in any font, size, style or color, but "even if applicant’s mark were displayed in a style of lettering highly similar to that of registrant’s mark, the two marks would still not be visually similar." [read post]
17 Jul 2019, 2:56 am
In re Mauna Kea Rum Company, LLC, Serial No. 87475384 (June 27, 2019) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Jonathan Hudis).The Marks: The Board found the term MAUNA KEA to be the dominant element of the applied-for mark and the cited mark. [read post]
20 Sep 2017, 2:40 am
"Employment of a mark to promote a service not yet rendered is not use of a mark in commerce under the statute. [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 3:20 am
But what about the marks? [read post]
TTAB Affirms Refusal to Register Blue Bundle of Dental Floss Due to Lack of Acquired Distinctiveness
19 Jan 2024, 4:15 am
" So, too, with regard to a product configuration mark. [read post]
13 Apr 2021, 3:37 am
Are the marks close enough for confusion? [read post]
22 Nov 2023, 4:13 am
" With regard the Board's consideration of the prosecution history of the TREK mark, wherein Trek argued that its mark was not confusable with five other marks containing the word TREK, the Board found that the RANGER TREK mark could co-exist with TREK as well. [read post]
2 Mar 2022, 4:37 am
It has used TINKER BELL as a trademark for dolls since 2007 and registered the mark in 2009 without a Section 2(f) acquired distinctiveness claim.Appellant United challenged the Board's findings on the strength of Disney's mark and the similarity of the involved marks. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 4:22 am
’” Applicant argued, however, that consumers would not "stop and translate" the mark, and therefore that the marks are not confusingly similar. [read post]
20 Aug 2014, 2:49 am
Applicant, in turn, claimed that the cited mark is weak in view of numerous VS marks used on similar goods, but she failed to provide any supporting evidence. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 2:57 am
Two marks are legally equivalent when a "consumer would consider them both the same mark. [read post]
5 May 2010, 2:33 am
Putting that aside, do you think the marks are confusingly similar? [read post]
18 May 2012, 7:36 pm
Mark Lynas has has just published an article in the Guardian about energy policy in Asia. [read post]
29 Jan 2020, 3:45 am
The application was rejected as the DKPTO found the mark descriptive for sports clothing. [read post]
