Search for: "Juice Generation Inc."
Results 81 - 100
of 246
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Aug 2018, 11:55 am
The Board held that nine registrations fell short of the extensive and voluminous use evidence presented in Jack Wolfskin and Juice Generation, where third party registrations and use evidence was used to show that a mark was weak and should be given a narrow scope of protection. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 3:48 am
Juice Generation, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2018, 2:46 am
Juice Generation, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jun 2018, 3:02 am
This evidence was "far less voluminous and compelling" than that in Jack Wolfskin and Juice Generation. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 3:04 pm
But as Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. [read post]
2 May 2018, 1:30 am
Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2018, 9:00 pm
Inc. [read post]
19 Jan 2018, 4:00 am
Duty is not applied to apple juice. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 7:32 am
There, the Eastern District of Washington rejected an insurer’s attempt to escape insurance coverage for a Proposition 65 lawsuit filed against juice-maker Tree Top Inc. [read post]
26 Oct 2017, 2:53 am
" Brooks Sports, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Oct 2017, 6:49 pm
My statement would be true if I also had cereal and juice. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 2:49 am
Omaha Steaks International, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Sep 2017, 3:33 am
Midnight Velvet, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 3:18 am
"The Board noted that in Jack Wolfskin there were at least 14 relevant third-party uses and registrations, and in Juice Generation there were 26.The Board recognized that there is a "certain degree of weakness in the cited mark, but even weak marks are entitled to protection against similar marks for identical goods and/or services.And so the Board found confusion likely and it affirmed the refusal.Read comments and post your comment here.TTABlog comment: What do you… [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 10:06 am
Republic Services, Inc., No. [read post]
21 Apr 2017, 2:17 am
Cir. 2001)The Board further noted that, to the extent applicant contends that the cited registrations should be treated in the same manner as third-party registrations, these two registrations "do not persuade us that the phrase SOUTHERN GIRL(S) 'has a normally understood and well-recognized descriptive or suggestive meaning, leading to the conclusion that that [term] is relatively weak.'" Juice Generation, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 4:54 am
"And so the Board reversed the refusal.Read comments and post your comment here.TTABlog comment: This is one of the infrequent, post-Juice Generation TTAB decisions in which the number of third-party uses (3) and registrations (9) were sufficient to affect the Section 2(d) outcome, even without proof of the manner and extent of use of the third-party marks. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 4:12 pm
This could be what distinguishes this case from the two cases cited in support by the applicant, Juice Generation, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Feb 2017, 10:00 pm
Fox Ridge Farm Inc. dba Wilson’s Orchard, Solon, IA In a Jan. 20 warning letter to Paul L. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 5:11 am
Cir. 2015) (quoting Juice Generation, Inc. v. [read post]
