Search for: "Mark"
Results 6961 - 6980
of 151,817
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jul 2018, 5:58 am
" Plaintiff's evidence also established the fame of that mark, as well as of the JACKSON 5IVE mark. [read post]
14 Apr 2019, 4:41 am
The USPTO found the two marks confusingly similar. [read post]
3 Nov 2022, 4:16 am
Moreover, the Board found that the design elements in Fancy Pants's mark sufficed to distinguish its mark from the SMOK mark. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 3:35 am
Of course it all came down to the marks and, while noting the facts that HAZE is the second word in each mark and that HAZE may have some meaning in the context of beer, the Board concluded that applicant's mark appears to be a variant of opposer's. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 3:59 am
Marks incorporating the VAGI-prefix, including Opposer’s mark VAGISIL, will bar the registration of marks as to which the resemblance to [Opposer’s mark] is striking enough to cause one seeing it to assume that there is some connection, association or sponsorship between the two. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 6:00 am
The Board granted Merchant & Gould's petition for cancellation of a registration for the mark MG-IP, finding the mark likely to cause confusion petitioner's previously-used mark M&G, both for legal services. [read post]
4 Aug 2016, 11:55 pm
Because “descriptive/suggestive” marks are, in some sense, more descriptive of the goods or services to which they relate than are fanciful marks, it is easier to come up with such a mark. [read post]
6 Sep 2019, 3:22 am
The fame of either a cited mark or an applied-for mark makes it "more likely that purchasers will remember the famous mark and think of it when encountering similar goods sold under a similar mark. [read post]
2 Apr 2024, 1:00 am
The contested trade mark is not a mere figurative mark, but a position trade mark and must be assessed as such. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 1:29 am
Yet conversely, in the opinion of these KatFriends, the case at hand demonstrates that it is conceivable that there is due cause to use a mark, but the way it takes place is contrary to honest practices.Using a mark as a book title may fall within the scope of protection granted by freedom of expression and freedom of information, but there are many ways to depict the mark when exercising these rights. [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 3:49 am
The Board, however, observed that its decision affects only the right to register the subject mark and does not impede their right to use the mark. [read post]
12 Jun 2020, 4:14 am
Consumers are likely to view applicant's mark, with the elimination of the word "JUST," as a variation of the cited mark. [read post]
6 Jun 2022, 5:32 am
Barclays had let the registrations for the mark lapse, and so Tiger Lily alleged that Barclays abandoned its mark, thereby making the mark available for Tiger Lily’s adoption and use and negating Barclays’ claim of priority. [read post]
19 Apr 2022, 4:58 am
" In sum, the Board found the marks to be "highly similar. [read post]
27 Nov 2020, 1:05 am
As a result, under certain circumstances, the protection of marks per se may be better achieved through other legal mechanisms, such as registration of the mark or relying on the protection conferred on a well-known mark. [read post]
13 Aug 2018, 3:59 am
"Similarity of the Marks: The Board found the marks to be "similar in appearance and sound to the extent that Applicant’s LEGION OF GOOD WILL mark fully encompasses the registered GOODWILL mark. [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 4:47 am
Referring to the statutory definition of abandonment in Section 45, the Board observed that "[t]he second part of the statute provides that a mark shall be deemed to be abandoned" when the mark "lose[s] its significance as a mark. [read post]
24 Jul 2019, 2:36 am
"The Marks: The Board found that the marks sound and look similar to the extent that they contain the identical words. [read post]
15 Jul 2013, 4:27 am
The action actually concerned four registered trade marks -- two Community trade marks and two UK marks -- as well as an allegation of passing off. [read post]
18 Dec 2007, 8:40 pm
And Applicant's mark could be displayed in the manner in which Opposer's mark is displayed. [read post]
