Search for: "Mark S. Humphreys"
Results 101 - 120
of 385
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Sep 2019, 1:34 am
Circuit Court in New York City has upheld a lower court determination that retailer New York & Company’s infringement of women’s apparel designer 4 Pillar Dynasty LLC’s “Velocity” mark was willful, and its award to 4 Pillar Dynasty of the gross profits derived from this infringement was legally appropriate. [read post]
3 Sep 2019, 11:41 am
It held that NATEXO’s use of the mark appeared to imply that the competition was organized by BIMBO, or at least sponsored by BIMBO. [read post]
21 Aug 2019, 11:57 pm
A jury properly found that owners and landlords of the International Discount Mall in College Park, Georgia, had at least constructive knowledge that subtenants were infringing Luxottica Group’s Ray-Ban and Oakley marks by selling counterfeit sunglasses, the U.S. [read post]
21 Aug 2019, 12:29 am
In this context, the ORTLIEB mark was held not to be exhausted either, because use of the mark to lead to third-parties’ offers was held to impair the origin function. [read post]
13 Aug 2019, 4:15 am
Red Bull’s argument that the requirements for clarity and precision of colour combination marks ultimately resulted in abolishing these and only allowing figurative or position marks did not succeed, despite MARQUES siding with Red Bull and intervening before both the General Court and the CJEU. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 4:17 am
Robert MargolisA licensor’s failure to disclose in discovery an agreement acknowledging that a third party owned the mark was properly sanctioned. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 8:24 am
The case regards Hasbro, Inc’s EUTM registration of the word mark MONOPOLY for goods and services in classes 9, 16, 28 and 41. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 2:26 am
S. [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 4:05 am
The plaintiffs include companies like M/S Amway India Enterprises Pvt Ltd, M/S Modicare Ltd., and M/S Oriflame India Pvt Ltd. [read post]
30 Jul 2019, 1:45 am
Substantial evidence supported the USPTO’s refusal to register the mark ARTISAN NY, for clothing, on likelihood of confusion grounds, the U.S. [read post]
17 Jul 2019, 8:26 am
Stay tuned for more updates from Canada and hopefully more NBA Championships for Canada’s Raptors. [read post]
15 Jul 2019, 3:26 am
The Patents and Market Court reversed the PRV’s ruling and admitted ROSLAGSÖL to registration. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 5:00 am
The applicant appealed to the Metropolitan Court (Fővárosi Törvényszék) and requested the annulment of HIPO’s decision, and, secondarily, a referral to the CJEU. [read post]
4 Jul 2019, 3:00 am
“ (There’s nothing good. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 8:22 am
This finding was supported by the additional evidence filed in the proceedings including a 2015 EUIPO decision rejecting an invalidity action against the Plaintiff’s colour mark. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 1:22 am
I CSK 263/18 The Polish Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) overturned the judgment of the Warsaw Court of Appeal (case no. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 1:40 am
The dispute started in October 2017 when the energy company DONG Energy A/S decided to change their name to ØRSTED, using the mark figuratively as To give you an idea of the commercial interest in the new name for the energy company, you must know that Ørsted is the largest power producer in Denmark with a group revenue of DKK 76.9 billion (EUR 10.7 billion). [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 8:09 am
Rubin, Missing the (Certification) Mark: How The Lanham Act Unnecessarily Restricts State and Local Governments as Certifiers, 71 Stan. [read post]
13 Jun 2019, 2:01 am
Robert MargolisDistrict court correctly held that trademark owner failed to raise genuine factual issue as to secondary meaning of the asserted mark. [read post]
5 Jun 2019, 7:32 am
The court found the mark “POWER FLEX” to be infringing the plaintiff’s house mark “POWER” which has been in use for almost 50 years. [read post]
