Search for: "J. Remington" Results 1 - 20 of 34
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jun 2017, 11:52 am by CrimProf BlogEditor
Holst (University of Wisconsin Law School, Frank J. [read post]
7 Nov 2006, 4:49 pm
The application was published in 1996, and Remington opposed it under ss.3(1)(a) and (b), 3(2) and 3(3).Once Jacob J found the mark to be invalid, Remington argued that for Philips to continue to resist the opposition on the 3D mark was res judicata, and hence an abuse of process. [read post]
14 Oct 2013, 4:31 pm by Lawrence Solum
Carrie Sperling (University of Wisconsin Law School, Frank J. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 12:16 pm by David M. Ward
I think we learned on Remingtons, ancient mechanical monsters that made typing a labor-intensive chore. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 6:22 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Democrats set their sights on his seat after he made damaging comments about keeping his salary during the federal government shutdown in Michael J. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 4:47 pm by Ashley Green
Jacob J found that the mark had never been used without the well-known PHILISHAVE trade mark or trusted to do the “job” of a trademark on its own. [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
Willard Hurst and Frank Remington. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 10:46 am
Arnold J's ruling is noted by the IPKat here, and the original decision by the Hearing Officer, the seasoned Allan James, is here; the IPKat hosted a guest comment on this decision by young barrister Katherine Moggridge here. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 2:51 am
 And if universities take the lead in responsible brand-building, perhaps they will set a good example for other commercial sectors in which goods and services are supplied under the limp banner of pathetic slogans that may mean a lot to their owners but which are rarely if ever considered to be brands or origin identifiers by the public at large.Merpel agrees: she recalls the admirable expression "limping trade marks", coined by Jacob J (as he then was) in Philips Electonics NV v… [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 12:04 am by Jeremy Speres
Jacobs J (as he then was) coined the phrase “limping trade mark” in the Philips v Remington UK case. [read post]
15 Nov 2019, 3:42 am by José Guillermo
A un paso de cruzar el umbral del local de antigüedades, tan presentes por ser irrepetibles, como el inmenso reloj de pie  -más de dos metros de alto- trabajado en fina caoba discretamente labrada con el péndulo detenido por falta de cuerda, el "tic-tac sería insoportable;  la máquina de escribir Remington en su primera versión, los Escudos nobiliarios cuyos ancestros se pierden en el tiempo, las mesas de centro con el tablero de… [read post]
19 Aug 2016, 5:53 am by Markus Lenssen
The Federal Court of Justice also refers to the corresponding understanding of the decision in re Improver Corporation v Remington Consumer Products Ltd (Hoffman J), [1990] FSR 181 Rn. 289 of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales and confirms that  German and English case law follow the same rules on this issue. [read post]
25 Oct 2016, 1:49 am
  Carr J recalled that one of his concerns when he represented Philips in the Philips v Remington litigation was that three heads (on the Philips shaver) would be said to add substantial value. [read post]