Search for: "In re Mark W." Results 81 - 100 of 2,204
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Oct 2019, 1:56 am
In re Conservative Institute, LLC, Serial No. 87658084 (October 8, 2019) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas W. [read post]
9 Sep 2019, 9:15 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  NG offered a Certificate of Analysis showing that the product being tested, “NEO Dry Blend BC Flavor w/ Vit C[,]” contained sodium nitrite, which it said was a nitrite salt. [read post]
27 Nov 2020, 3:44 am
In re Win Win Asian Restaurant, LLC, Serial No. 88412518 (November 24, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. [read post]
27 Nov 2017, 3:26 am
In re Russell Ortiz, Serial No. 86817718 (November 22, 2017) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas W. [read post]
31 Mar 2017, 7:49 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Inverted U phenomenon we’re arguing for is limited to those super-strong marks. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 7:19 am
" The Board noted that "[w]hile not conclusive of consumer perception of the mark, Opposer’s prior statements are facts to be considered in our analysis. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 4:21 am
Roman Atwood, Cancellation No. 92062027 (November 28, 2018) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. [read post]
16 Sep 2020, 3:12 am
In re Miranda Frye Inc., Serial No. 88347449 (September 10, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas W. [read post]
13 Aug 2021, 3:49 am
In re David Ceniceros, Serial No. 88636171 (July 29, 2021) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 5:20 am
In re Kinetixx Golf, LLC, Serial No. 87671054 (December 15, 2021) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. [read post]
12 Jan 2024, 3:35 am
In re James Lindsay, Serial No. 90793706 (January 8, 2034) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas W. [read post]
10 Apr 2012, 2:38 am by John L. Welch
"[W]e are clearly missing the 'link' between the mark as used in the specimens and retail store services. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 3:57 am
On July 30, the Board re-designated as precedential (here) its decision in In re Graystone Consulting Associates, Inc., Serial No. 85913509 (May 12, 2015), affirming a refusal to register the mark WALK-IN SHOPPER for "business training consultancy services" on the ground that the specimen of use (shown below) failed to show use of the mark in connection with the identified services. click on image for larger pictureThe Board observed that "[a]… [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 9:06 am by Tucker Chambers
The post You’re Being Audited … by the Trademark Office? [read post]