Search for: "Mark C. Good"
Results 881 - 900
of 5,962
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2014, 2:51 pm
The Court ruled on the bitter-sweet issue of the genuine use of an earlier national trade mark for the purposes of proof of use within an opposition proceeding before the OHIM (Case C-141/13 P Reber Holding GmbH & Co. [read post]
5 Mar 2008, 4:49 am
Burgomaster, Scott C. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 4:08 am
Francis Paper, Inc., Cancellation No. 92073884 [Petitioner for cancellation of a registration for the mark LITTLE NOTES for address books, greeting cards, calendars, note paper, and the like, on the ground of likelihood of confusion with petitioner's identical common law mark for overlapping goods.] [read post]
10 Oct 2019, 10:00 pm
Trademark rights allow (a) the owner the right to build goodwill with the mark and (b) consumer identification of goods and services from a particular source. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 8:14 pm
§ 1030(a)(2)(C). [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 3:33 am
Screenshots bearing the domain name www.weaponxperformance.com that display the mark WEAPONX, on their face do not prove that Opposer was the owner of the websites or that the mark displayed on the websites was being used by Opposer for the goods and services identified on the webpage. [read post]
20 Sep 2015, 11:28 pm
In answering the question, the CJEU restated the principles established in its earlier jurisprudence, in particular the Colloseum case (judgment of 18 April 2013, C-12/12). [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 10:55 am
The district court trial judge dismissed the suit on the ground that plaintiffs abandoned the “Eva’s Bridal” mark by engaging in naked licensing — that is, by allowing others to use the mark without exercising “reasonable control over the nature and quality of the goods, services, or business on which the [mark] is used by the licensee”. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 1:59 am
Case C 147/14 Loutfi Management Propriété intellectuelle SARL v AMJ Meatproducts NV, Halalsupply NV is a Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruling last Thursday in a Community trade mark-related reference from Belgium. [read post]
20 Nov 2007, 3:22 am
., No. 02 C 7345, 2007 WL 3357631 (N.D. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 3:02 am
"[B]rand clarity is a consumer good," and the attacks on dilution law as protecting marks, not consumers, are off the mark.He believes that the "guidelines" incorporated into the TDRA "will facilitate predictability and ameliorate the expense of dilution protection." [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 12:20 am
Under these provisions, the plaintiffs contended, the Board had a “perverse” disincentive to negotiate above the $30 million mark. [read post]
20 Feb 2006, 1:33 pm
In re Mark, 2006 WL 164883 (Bankr. [read post]
8 Nov 2016, 9:07 am
The court then says Section 230(c)(1) preempts Darnaa’s intentional interference with prospective economic advantage claim but not her good faith and fair dealing claim. [read post]
27 Mar 2024, 3:47 am
Russell, Serial No. 90432695 (March 25, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cynthia C. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 7:48 pm
They provide that signs can't be registered as trade marks if they are devoid of distinctive character or consist exclusively of signs or indications "which may serve, in trade, to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, or the time of production of the goods or of rendering of the service, or other characteristics of the goods or services". [read post]
9 Apr 2019, 4:45 am
And so, the Board affirmed the refusal to register Applicant’s mark on the Supplemental Register, allowing competitors to freely use the term to refer to their own goods and services.Read comments and post your comment here.TTABlog comment: Would Chocolate Chip Blueberry Muffin be a sub-sub-genus? [read post]
31 May 2024, 12:02 pm
As a reminder, in order for a trade mark to possess distinctive character for the purposes of Article 7(1)(b), it must serve to identify the goods or services in respect of which registration is sought as originating from a particular undertaking, and therefore distinguish those goods from those of other undertakings (Promed, T-30/20). [read post]
17 Oct 2018, 3:11 am
MCNS Polyurethanes USA Inc., Opposition No. 91227865 (September 28, 2018) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Geogre C. [read post]
27 Nov 2020, 3:44 am
About a dozen years ago, a TTAB judge said to me that one can predict the outcome of a Section 2(d) case 95% of the time just by looking at the marks and the goods or services. [read post]
