Search for: "In Zone Brands, Inc. v. United States"
Results 1 - 20
of 54
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 May 2016, 12:34 pm
In August 2015, the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Varsity Brands, Inc.. v. [read post]
25 Aug 2019, 2:28 pm
Boldface Licensing + Branding v. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 8:54 am
Maine Springs, LLC v. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 7:41 am
On June 30, 2020, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Patent and Trademark Office v. [read post]
11 Dec 2010, 1:36 pm
Chanel, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jul 2021, 3:43 am
” Otto Int’l Inc. v. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 10:34 am
Editor's NotesFor further insight, check out the Audio Brief of oral arguments in Nautilus, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2020, 2:47 am
Mondelēz International, Inc. manufactures and distributes those products by its various family members.Ominously for Retrobrands’ petition, the Board started its discussion by stating that, “CHICLETS branded gum has been sold in the United States continuously by various predecessors-in-interest since around 1900. [read post]
5 Jul 2022, 7:30 am
Meenaxi Enterprise, Inc. v. [read post]
13 May 2020, 12:12 pm
Pick your own fandom.The cause for all this pop culture excitement is the decision in In Zone Brands, Inc. and Good2Grow, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 11:49 am
In United States Patent and Trademark Office v Booking.com BV, the court upheld a Fourth Circuit decision stating that simply adding a top-level domain to a generic term does not render the mark generic in its entirety. [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 3:47 am
Chutter, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 4:27 pm
(United States v. [read post]
11 May 2015, 11:30 am
Id.The United States Supreme Court found such an intent in the Lanham Act inSteele v. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 5:04 am
Babbit Electronics, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Feb 2013, 12:00 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 9:57 am
Southern Electronics Supply, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 4:59 am
Maine Springs, LLC v. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 1:09 pm
For example, in 2020 the PTO denied registration to the mark TRUMP TOO SMALL in connection with T-shirts, even though the applicant argued that the mark was “political commentary about presidential candidate and president Donald Trump that the relevant consumer in the United States would not understand to be sponsored by, endorsed by, or affiliated with Donald Trump. [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 3:30 am
North Atlantic Operating Company, Inc., North Atlantic Trading Company, Inc. and National Tobacco Company, LP v. [read post]
