Search for: "In Re Application U-2"
Results 81 - 100
of 815
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2017, 12:59 pm
Le droit applicable est celui de l'état du for. [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 12:00 pm
"Applicant filed its I-T-U application on March 31, 2003 and has not yet used the mark for the identified goods.The Board observed that an opposer who relies on an unregistered mark in a 2(d) opposition must show that its term is distinctive of the goods. [read post]
20 Jan 2019, 11:43 pm
2. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 3:51 am
Y., 447 U. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 2:30 pm
* Cites argument re. [read post]
26 Feb 2015, 2:22 pm
§ 706(2)(A).When reviewing an agency’s statutory interpretation, this court appliesthe two-step framework established in Chevron, U.S.A. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 12:44 pm
U. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 1:27 pm
S. ___, ___ (2014) (slip op., at 2). [read post]
25 Oct 2010, 4:16 pm
Arizona argues that the district court erred by basing its conclusion on a “potential” burden that section 2(B) could impose on lawfully-present aliens (examples include, asylum applicants, people with temporary protected status, or U and T non-immigrant visa applicants). [read post]
13 May 2016, 10:43 am
Send back some edits and see how they’re received. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 12:58 pm
While similar to Please Rob Me, the key difference is the large majority of users profiled by I Can Stalk U have no idea they’re giving out this information. [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 10:01 pm
Jan. 31, 2008):As stated above, a writ of habeas corpus will not be issued unless the state court's legal conclusions are "contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States," 28 U .S.C. [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 2:37 am
Brady, 98 USPQ2d 1830 (TTAB 2011) [not precedential].Kaplan filed an I-T-U application for the mark FUNNY FACE FIZZY BLAST! [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 7:19 am
" In re Raven Marine, Inc., 217 USPQ 68, 70 (TTAB 1983), citing Pneutek, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2023, 2:20 pm
________, 2. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 6:18 am
Similarly, 'U' awards are for consortia that are to be coordinately managed. [read post]
13 Jul 2018, 1:57 pm
” In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, 837 F. 3d 175, 189 (2016). [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 10:24 pm
"Moreover, the Board found that this acquired distinctiveness is transferred to the cereal-based food bars of the subject application.Thus Kellogg's arguments failed to satisfy its initial burden of challenging or rebutting General Mills' 2(f) showing made during prosecution and accepted by the Examining Attorney, and therefore the opposition was dismissed.TTABlog note: Another example of the transfer of acquired distinctiveness to an I-T-U application is… [read post]
29 Jul 2022, 2:47 pm
Appx2423 (Aikens Dep. 132:2–10). [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 2:40 am
In re E5 LLC, 103 USPQ2d 1578 (TTAB 2012) [precedential].The test for deceptiveness under Section 2(a) is set forth in In re Budge, 8 USPQ2d 1259, 1260 (Fed. [read post]
