Search for: "Design A Shirt LLC"
Results 81 - 100
of 243
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Sep 2019, 3:27 am
October 24, 2019 - 11 AM: In re La Mamba, LLC., Serial No. 87791970 [Section 2(d) refusal of PARC & LEX in the design form shown below, for “Clothing, namely, t-shirts, sweatshirts, skirts, pants, jeans, coats, dresses, underwear, tops and bottoms; headwear; footwear,” in view of the registered mark PARK & LEX for "Jewelry, namely, necklaces, bracelets and earrings"].Read comments and post your comment here.TTABlog note: Any predictions? [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 3:02 am
[TTABlogged here].Product Source International, LLC v. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 3:58 am
Employers name and location: Imagine Screen Printing & Productions LLC, which imprints graphic design images onto apparel such as t-shirts and sweatshirts. [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 5:14 pm
” One of the first things we learn during Monday’s arguments in Star Athletica LLC v. [read post]
5 Jan 2024, 3:33 am
Fatbear Scooters, LLC, Isaac Ashkenazie and Isaac D. [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 10:17 pm
Art Attacks’ “Spoiled Brats” designs (top) and MGA’s “Bratz” dolls:No secondary meaning, no foul Plaintiff Art Attacks Ink, LLC, sells a “Spoiled Brats” collection of t-shirts featuring cartoonish, predominantly female characters, with oversized eyes, disproportionately large heads and feet, makeup, and bare midriffs. [read post]
17 May 2023, 4:07 am
In and exhaustive and exhausting 69-page decision, the Board sustained-in-part and dismissed-in-part Starbucks' opposition to registration of the mark SIREN'S BREW ("BREW" disclaimed), finding confusion likely with the Starbucks design logo with regard to applicant's "coffee beans," but not as to applicant's "shirts; sweat shirts. [read post]
4 Mar 2022, 3:18 am
In re TRUsox LLC., Serial No. 88931435 (February 25, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Melanye K. [read post]
3 Jul 2017, 5:07 am
July 12, 2017 - 10 AM: In re Serial Podcast, LLC, Serial Nos. 86454420 et al. [read post]
2 Mar 2018, 2:27 pm
Copyright protection is typically sought to protect the two-dimensional aspects of clothing design, while design law may protect the three-dimensional design and shape of the piece. [read post]
2 Mar 2018, 2:27 pm
Copyright protection is typically sought for the two-dimensional aspects of clothing design, while design law may protect the three-dimensional design and shape of the piece. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 4:20 am
Uninterrupted IP, LLC, Opposition No. 91244990 (December 14, 2023) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Mark A. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 3:39 am
Disidual Clothing, LLC, Opposition No. 91212768 (March 28, 2015) [not precedential] [TTABlogged here]. [read post]
29 Oct 2021, 3:39 am
., Serial No. 88674888 [Section 2(d) refusal of MATCH STUDIO for "clothing, namely, tops and bottoms," in view of the mark MATCH in standard character and design form for overlapping clothing items.] [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 4:05 am
In re Lizzo LLC, 23 USPQ2d 139 (TTAB 2023) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. [read post]
16 Jul 2008, 8:08 am
Genetic Denim, LLC, CV 08-04016 R (C.D. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 8:42 am
This ruling effects companies selling seemingly harmless satirical products, such as the t-shirt company using known NFL designs and marks or the sellers on Etsy or Shopify making and selling t-shirts modeled off of popular tv shows. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 2:58 am
There, Pearle Vision sought to register PEARLE VISION CENTER with a design element, while already owning registrations for PEARL VISION CENTER in standard character form. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 12:54 pm
Although Life:Currated is responsible for the offensive description, Tetris is covering all of its grounds by going to the designer of the shirt and demanding that their trademark be removed from any associations with the shirt. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 3:47 am
Luscious, LLC, Opposition No. 91158982 [Section 2(d) opposition to LUSCIOUS COSMETICS for cosmetics, including bath soaps, in view of the registered mark LUSH for overlapping products].March 22, 2012 - 2 PM: Apple Inc. v. [read post]
