Search for: "Mark C. Good" Results 961 - 980 of 5,978
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2012, 2:45 am by John L. Welch
"[C]onsumers may believe that SUPER CHIRO TEA and CHIRO-KLENZ are different varieties of the CHIRO line of tea. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 4:36 am by Rebecca Tushnet
A symbol can be arbitrary/fanciful and still ornamental b/c we don’t consider it to be a mark. [read post]
8 Oct 2013, 3:24 am
 Since no reputation had been proved for the Monte-Carlo mark, the claim for infringement under Article 9(1)(c) of the same Regulation had to fail. [read post]
27 May 2021, 11:08 am by Tian Lu
" [C-371/18 Skykick, para 77] At the same time, the ECJ explicitly stated that a lack of economic activity as such does not establish bad faith. [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 10:17 pm
"Opposer's mark is COTT, while applicant's mark depicts CO in large letters, with the word tea, the flavor and major ingredient of the goods, written in smaller letters below it. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 12:30 am
  They have some interesting thoughts on non-traditional trade marks and the impact of the recent EU trade mark reforms. [read post]
8 Nov 2009, 9:36 am
Is any such use "in relation to" goods and services identical to those for which the trade mark is registered within the meaning of Article 5(l)(a) of the Trade Marks Directive and Article 9(1)(a) of the CTM Regulation? [read post]
12 Jun 2007, 7:28 am
The examiner said no, it was non-distinctive under Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation 40/94 because it was of the function of the goods for which the mark was to be registered. [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 12:42 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  Also doesn’t matter if a word is considered generic for the relevant goods or services, or for some other goods or services, in certain jurisdictions. [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 3:47 am
The Board rejected applicant’s contention that its proposed mark CLEAR does not describe a plausible feature of its goods because the identified goods do not include transparent footwear and clothing. [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 3:36 am by Jeffrey Vicq
The amended Act also gives CIPO the ability to force applicants (and the owners of registered marks) to organize the goods and services claims associated with their marks into the applicable Nice classes. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 3:49 am
By application of Article 9 (2) (a) of Regulation No 2015/2424, the proprietor of a trade mark is entitled to prohibit a third party from using, without the proprietor’s consent, a sign identical with that trade mark when that use is in the course of trade, is in relation to goods or services which are identical with, or similar to, those for which that trade mark is registered, and affects, or is liable to affect, the functions of the… [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 3:02 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  Trademark claiming: 2D in terms of having a mark and a class of goods/services. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:07 am by John L. Welch
It used its COLON CLEANSE mark since 1988, sold more than $54 million in goods between 2002 and 2009, and advertises in major media. [read post]
9 May 2013, 11:56 am
Tough Mudder claims that its first use in commerce of both the Tough Mudder mark and the Mudder family of marks predate the Hollaways' first use and therefore Tough Mudder's use of the marks has priority. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 11:00 am
"[C]ontrary to applicant's arguments, the picture of the goods in the catalog in Lands' End and the display of the product at the website in Dell were important factors in the holdings in those cases. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 12:52 am
Bearing this in mind, Case T 378/13 Apple and Pear Australia Ltd and Star Fruits Diffusion v OHIM, Carolus C. [read post]
26 Oct 2016, 12:22 pm
" Defendants own and run a website, TRIPLEAPARTS.COM, on which they advertise automobile-related goods and services. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 5:57 am
Alliant Techsystems Inc., Oppositions Nos. 91173785 and 91174067 [Oppositions to registration of the two marks shown below, for tactical gear and tactical equipment for military, law enforcement and defense applications, on the grounds of fraud and likelihood of confusion with opposer's OMEGA marks for watches and other goods]. [read post]