Search for: "In Re Lisa, Inc." Results 121 - 140 of 338
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Dec 2014, 3:41 am
The Board, however, observed that the word portion is not always dominant, citing several prior Board decisions in which the design was deemed dominant.The Board noted that in In re Viterra, the CAFC acknowledged the general rule when finding that the word portion predominated in the registered mark X-Seed & Design (shown below).But in Viterra, the CAFC also found no inconsistency with the Board's ruling in In re White Rock Distilleries, Inc., where the Board… [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 1:11 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Evident from usual surveys that courts accept that courts don’t really know what they’re trying to measure. [read post]
11 Oct 2014, 9:45 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Lisa Ramsey (making the argument that only arbitrary etc. marks should be protected, not descriptive marks at all). [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 5:36 am by Amy Howe
  Two different articles look ahead at next month’s oral argument in the securities case Omnicare, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 8:40 am by WIMS
Nothing We're Tracking Today (click for the complete Energy & EPA announcements)   (c)Waste Information & Management Services, Inc. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 4:05 am by Amy Howe
John Fund, the Court rejected Halliburton’s request that it reverse its decision in Basic, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 8:42 am by WIMS
Nothing We're Tracking Today (click for the complete Energy & EPA announcements)     (c)Waste Information & Management Services, Inc. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 6:00 am by Amy Howe
” Briefly: At Lawfare, Steve Vladeck looks at KBR, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2014, 8:33 am by WIMS
Nothing We're Tracking Today (click for the complete Energy & EPA announcements)   (c)Waste Information & Management Services, Inc. [read post]
21 Feb 2014, 8:07 am by WIMS
Register to view webcast by The US National Academy of Sciences and The Royal Society re: a new publication produced jointly by the two institutions. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 2:58 am
 In re Lipstik, Inc., Serial No. 85663715 (January 22, 2014) [not precedential].As to the overlapping goods in the application and cited registration, the Board presumed that they travel through the same channels of trade to the same classes of consumers. [read post]