Search for: "Mark"
Results 7441 - 7460
of 151,845
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2017, 5:44 am
The Board reversed a Section 2(a) refusal of the mark shown below for travel agency services, rejecting the USPTO's contention that the mark includes matter that falsely suggests an association with Disney Enterprises, Inc. [read post]
28 Oct 2015, 3:50 am
The registrant here has as yet no proprietary rights in a mark …. [read post]
20 Jan 2020, 10:00 pm
” The applicants notably include Fox Media, who wishes to use the mark for a television series. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 3:34 am
There was no evidence that customers associate the mark with the goods. [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 3:28 am
"Opposer Barnard claimed that he started using the MANDALA mark in 2019. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 3:56 am
" Moreover, the word INDESTRUCTIBLE is not disclaimed in the cited mark. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 3:08 am
The marks cited by applicant were either unitary marks in which disclaimer of "super" would not be required, or, for registrations issuing after Phillips-Van Heusen, comprised the word "Super" followed by a suggestive term (e.g., SUPER STRAP, SUPER BRITE, SUPER EDGE). [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 3:21 am
But what about the marks? [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 3:45 am
The TTAB affirmed a refusal to register the mark STYLEHOUSE, in the form shown below, for various clothing items, finding the mark likely to cause confusion with the registered mark STYLEHAÜS for "retail clothing boutiques. [read post]
3 Nov 2017, 3:47 am
The combination of the two words does not significantly impact the overall impression of the mark, "although ZINFANDEL does make Applicant's mark look and sound more similar to Registrant's mark. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 2:39 pm
“Marks was summarily forced out of office by Gov. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 4:01 am
The Board granted a petition for cancellation of a registration for the mark THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF JEKYLL ISLAND for various tourism-related services, finding the mark to be deceptive under Section 2(e)(1). [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 8:56 am
[The Board granted a petition for cancellation of a registration for the mark NUTFFLES for "chocolate and candy," finding a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark P-NUTTLES for "nut candies."] [read post]
5 May 2017, 3:51 am
The Board found the marks to be substantially similar, since HAPPY HOUND is the dominant element in the cited mark. [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 2:59 am
The owner is the one that controls the nature and quality of the goods and services sold under the mark. [read post]
11 Aug 2023, 3:29 am
The USPTO refused to register the proposed mark S! [read post]
18 Aug 2015, 6:09 am
Moreover, the Greek Supreme Administrative Court concluded that the enhanced distinctive character of the earlier mark was also not taken into consideration by the appellate court.The judgment practically seems to point to a conclusion of confusing similarity between the marks. [read post]
3 Jun 2022, 3:31 am
The Marks: The word THE is "generally not significant in distinguishing one mark from another. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 3:29 am
Applicant pointed to two co-existing registrations for marks containing the phrases "MOTHER'S TOUCH" and "WOMAN'S TOUCH" for dentistry services as proof that its mark can co-exist with the cited mark. [read post]
27 Apr 2016, 3:02 am
The marks: The Board found the marks to be substantially similar in appearance and sound. [read post]
