Search for: "Matter of Mark T."
Results 1201 - 1220
of 14,945
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2023, 2:24 pm
The court also concluded that the defendants weren't entitled to recover fees under the New York anti-SLAPP statute, because The Letter concerns "a purely private matter" and was "directed only to a limited, private audience. [read post]
2 Oct 2024, 7:22 am
But this is a matter of law, not of wounded feelings. [read post]
6 Sep 2023, 10:53 am
In particular, Toyota USA doesn’t own the Toyota marks; it is a licensee. [read post]
2 Mar 2008, 4:02 pm
The Board disagreed:"As a matter of law, the doctrine of foreign equivalents does not apply to a foreign mark partially comprised of characters that have no English translation, at least with respect to Morehouse analysis. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 1:42 pm
The Lanham Act, which codifies US trade mark law, sets forth the various reasons why a mark will not be accepted for trade mark protection, including a mark which "consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter; or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute." [read post]
1 Jul 2009, 10:07 am
The question in the title of this post is prompted by this new article in USA Today, which is headlined "Appeal of Madoff's 150-year sentence wouldn't matter. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 2:34 am
If the COLOURBLIND case (Pangyrus Ltd v OHIM, RSVP Design Ltd, Case T-257/11) had been a movie, it would have secured a nomination for its intricate screenplay, in the spirit of the recent Academy Awards. [read post]
9 Jan 2025, 6:32 am
’” The Board deemed the marks dissimilar: “[t]he commercial impression of Petitioner’s Red Top Fence Post Mark, is a ‘red top,’ and the color red. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 9:23 am
Even if you don’t—or financially can’t—pursue trademark registration initially, it is an essential part of your start-up due diligence to investigate whether your proposed name or mark infringes on someone else’s existing trademark. [read post]
29 Sep 2010, 9:59 pm
Hey, you're brilliant--but it doesn't matter. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 10:57 am
The case marks another circuit court’s application of the materiality standard announced in Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. [read post]
25 Oct 2008, 4:36 pm
(Charon QC)Don't mess with a Rothschild…. [read post]
12 Dec 2022, 9:23 am
I didn't say that. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 12:00 pm
AT&T v. [read post]
11 Jun 2023, 6:09 pm
But the provision does discriminate based on content, because it bars registration of marks based on their subject matter. [read post]
26 Jul 2023, 2:17 pm
Unfortunately, in the past decade we have also seen a marked increase in the number of people ages 50 and up who are getting divorced. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 7:03 am
The district court didn’t make any finding on likely confusion, and its reasoning didn’t allow the court of appeals to infer such a finding. [read post]
13 Dec 2024, 4:32 am
If consumers don't or won't perceive a term as a indicating source, then the term is not a trademark (or service mark). [read post]
7 Feb 2021, 10:15 pm
CopyrightAsia Correspondent Tian Lu reported on an interesting copyright case in Japan, relating to artworks each comprising of a telephone booth being used as a goldfish tank.PatentsThe finely-tuned balance to be struck between novelty, insufficiency, and obviousness in deciding when to file a second-medical use patent application came under consideration of GuestKat Rose Hughes in relation to the Canadian Federal Court's approach in the recent case of Teva v Pharmascience.Trade marksKat… [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 2:40 pm
It is only a matter of time before things blow up again. [read post]
