Search for: "mark"
Results 7801 - 7820
of 136,174
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Apr 2010, 6:11 am
Here is this week’s collection: 1) Mark ... [read post]
5 May 2015, 3:56 am
The blog, from philosopher Mark Anderson (Belmont). [read post]
30 May 2007, 4:30 pm
Seventeen page analysis of the Olympics mark bill here. [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 11:09 am
Mark Shelden, the Champaign County Clerk, blogs about it.... [read post]
21 Nov 2010, 7:27 pm
Mark Greenberg has written this WaPo oped.... [read post]
4 Sep 2011, 8:31 pm
Mark Siegel has written this WaPo oped. [read post]
21 May 2024, 11:50 am
House Farm Bill Misses the Mark on Crop Insurance [read post]
27 Oct 2006, 4:07 pm
AN INTERVIEW WITH MARK STEYN: Over at Hot Air. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 12:48 pm
Interesting article by Mark Hermann in Above the Law.... [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 10:11 pm
Mark Schmitt has written this piece for The New Republic. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 4:47 pm
Skip ahead to the 1:00 mark. [read post]
2 May 2011, 9:11 am
Mark Brown has this commentary in the Sun Times.... [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 11:19 pm
" Therefore, the Board found the marks to be "substantially similar. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 8:24 am
The court found no likelihood of confusion between the two marks based on the café’s limited use of the mark. [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 3:00 am
The boy depicted in opposer's marks has nothing in his mouth. [read post]
3 Feb 2007, 3:35 pm
The post below gave me plenty of practice in typing real quotation marks ( " " ‘ ' ) instead of tick marks ( ' " ). [read post]
16 Dec 2010, 3:04 pm
As a result, commencing on January 1, 2011, CIPO will no longer raise an objection pursuant to Section 12(1)(i) of the Trade-marks Act on the basis that an applied for mark consists of or so nearly resembles as to be mistaken for a mark or expresssion found in either of those Schedules. [read post]
Ninth Circuit clarifies differences between proof of protectable trademark and proof of infringement
31 Dec 2007, 1:11 pm
A plaintiff must both prove that it has valid rights in a mark and that the defendant's use of its mark is likely to cause consumer confusion. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 8:42 pm
They’re the exclusive, nationwide user of the mark — not you. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 5:28 am
The district court issued a preliminary injunction against the defendant’s use of the mark, but granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant and dismissed the remainder of the case because defendant had no “use in commerce” of the mark. [read post]
