Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 1001 - 1020
of 19,778
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jun 2009, 5:25 am
In Speranza v. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 7:31 pm
The first being the claim that the defendant through the use of various IHOP marks is engaging in dilution under 15 U.S.C. 1125(c). [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 6:33 pm
Marking the 10th anniversary of Bush v. [read post]
29 Mar 2007, 5:12 am
ITC Ltd. v. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 8:28 am
(John Elwood) Marks v. [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 4:34 am
February 23, 2023 - 4:10 PM (Live at Arizona State University): El Burro, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2022, 12:34 pm
See United States v. [read post]
24 Nov 2022, 7:14 am
Mark V. [read post]
7 Oct 2019, 3:09 am
Cai v. [read post]
3 Jul 2015, 8:24 am
This being so, there was insufficient evidence to establish validity of the two Community trade marks through the acquisition of distinctive character.Revocation of the CTMs for non-use From a review of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and especially the ONEL/OMEL case [Case C-149/11 Leno Merken, noted by the IPKat here], it appeared that the law was as follows: (i) the question of whether there has been ‘genuine use in the Community’ is not to… [read post]
24 Aug 2007, 10:37 am
See Mark A. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 1:59 am
He went on to find that earlier pages in the sales process, including the full product details page, also targeted the UK, not least because that page stated “This item ships to the United Kingdom”. [read post]
4 Nov 2008, 12:37 pm
State v. [read post]
17 Feb 2011, 7:28 am
Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss defendant's false marking counterclaims for failure to state a claim was granted. [read post]
28 Oct 2015, 3:50 am
Jeffrey Feulner, P.A. v. [read post]
13 Dec 2011, 5:49 am
The Panel noted that Complainant “is …. recognized as the owner of a family of R US marks under the United States trademark law. [read post]
29 May 2012, 8:29 am
Adidas sues Wolverine for infringement of adidas’ three strip mark. [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 8:01 am
But in 2011, the court in Harrington v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 7:24 am
On appeal, however, it was found that the mark had become distinctive, within the meaning of Article 7(3), in the German and English-speaking member states. [read post]
7 Jan 2008, 1:22 am
United States v Arnold Decision (2006) In the NY Times story "Searching a computer", said Jennifer M. [read post]
