Search for: "Mark"
Results 8421 - 8440
of 151,847
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 May 2019, 3:43 am
The remaining one was cancelled in 2017.The Board concluded that opposer's mark belongs on the strong side of the spectrum from very strong to very weak marks.Comparing the Marks: The fact that the applied-for mark contains opposer's entire mark SURLY, which is a strong mark entitled to a broad scope of protection, "increases the similarity between them. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 3:24 am
Gorowitz).The Assigned Marks: The marks covered by the first four registrations were not in use when respondent acquired them in 2010. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 6:56 am
The U.S Court of Appeal held that;“Likely…to cause confusion” means more than the likelihood that the public will recall a famous mark on seeing the same mark used by another. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 2:06 am
The defendant countered that the member local networks were a class of entities, not an unincorporated association, and that since each member network had retained its own separate goodwill there had never been any collective ownership of the goodwill in the letters "OCN".Judge Hacon dismissed the trade mark infringement action in respect of the word marks but upheld the claims for trade mark infringement and for passing off with regard to the "swoosh"… [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 2:58 am
Volvo argued that "consumers who come across the ‘invented trade mark’ LOVOL will be intrigued by that new trade mark for cars, especially since the number of car manufacturers is relatively limited. ... consumers will ask themselves whether that new trade mark for cars has any connection with a very old and highly reputed trade mark for cars and will then be led to associate it with the trade mark VOLVO... [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 8:35 pm
The one hitch is the name must be perceived as a mark for literary services. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 3:14 am
But even sophisticated customers may be confused by very similar marks. [read post]
6 Feb 2017, 6:08 am
The Board found that neither mark had acquired distinctiveness, and so the only issue was whether petitioner used the mark first. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 9:23 pm
The more distinctive a trade mark the more likely confusion will occur when the mark is used on competing products; and4. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 1:21 am
If the mark does not do so, due to it being merely descriptive for example, it will be deemed an invalid mark. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 11:38 am
Although “the t-shirts, tote bags, and other products bearing the LTTB mark would still function as t- shirts and tote bags without the mark” and use of the mark doesn’t alter the cost structure of production or add to the [physical] quality of the products, but the question of aesthetic functionality is whether the marks “perform some function such that the exclusive use of the marks would put competitors at a significant… [read post]
8 Jan 2017, 1:35 am
Usually, the new owner quickly replaces the mark and brand with its own mark and brand; why remind patrons about your competitor? [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 3:48 am
" Comparing the marks, and noting the applicable disclaimers, the Board found WALDO to be the dominant element in both marks. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 1:23 am
The unfamiliarity of peoples' perceptions on sound marks is also added to by the classes of goods or services the mark is registered for. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 6:56 am
It offers its services under the registered mark SHAPES BROW BAR. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 2:54 am
"As to the marks, since the goods are legally identical a lesser degree of similarity between the marks is necessary to support a finding of likely confusion. [read post]
1 Aug 2018, 6:31 am
We find that this is bona fide use of the mark in the ordinary course of trade, and not merely to reserve a right in the mark.Tacking: Applicant claimed that it was entitled to priority by tacking on its SNACKEEZ DUO mark to its registered SNACKEEZ mark. [read post]
22 Aug 2024, 3:26 am
Other marks included a design element. [read post]
9 May 2011, 2:26 am
" The Board agreed that the numerous registrations for marks containing SIMPLICITY or SIMPLE, and the parties' own use of the word "simple," weakens the scope of protection for Hunt's mark. [read post]
4 Dec 2015, 4:44 pm
Suggestive marks are considered distinctive marks but receive a lesser amount of protection. [read post]
