Search for: "Matter of Mark T." Results 221 - 240 of 15,810
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Feb 2018, 5:29 am
  As Mr Justice Arnold said in paragraph 1 "[t]he case raises important issues of European trade mark law", which necessitates references to the CJEU on issues relating to (i) bad faith for filing with no intention to use and (ii) IP TRANSLATOR clarity issues. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 8:47 am by Michael C. Smith
Judge Folsom started by noting that Orvis had withdrawn its motion to dismiss claiming that no false marking occurred and that the complaint didn't meet minimum pleading standards, accordingly it was denied without prejudice. [read post]
15 Nov 2014, 6:11 pm
The use of "sensibly" in Judge Hacon's judgements is itself becoming something of a trade mark. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 8:22 am
For example in Hypen GmbH v EU IPO, Case T-146/15 the General Court held that, taking into account the intrinsic qualities and the greater or lesser degree of distinctive character of the mark, a circle around the mark in question was not sufficient to alter the distinctive character of the mark.Lets look at it this way.... [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 8:08 am by Seth Jaffe
  Here are a few: First, don’t read too much into this. [read post]
23 Dec 2021, 1:38 am by Roel van Woudenberg
The reasons for this were, in particular, that the subject-matter disclosed on page 9, line 23 to page 10, line 18, was "broader than the subject-matter of the allowable claim [sic] claim 17 which concerns the expression vector of the invention" and "[i]t cannot be interpreted that this passage concerns an embodiment which would be a dependent claim of claim 17". [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 4:48 am by Gritsforbreakfast
And some of them inevitably show up in the comments on Grits whenever they're mentioned to flame them for all they haven't done. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 4:25 am by Tom Kosakowski
“And that’s because the human condition isn’t all that different, back then or now. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 12:00 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
and didn’t show loss of sales, goodwill or ability to market that was caused by the false marking. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 7:12 am by Ernie Svenson
Some lawyers say that typography doesn't matter, but Butterick says they don't really believe that. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
It is true that none of the devices shown in the figures of document D14 is marked as “figure 9”. [read post]
28 Oct 2014, 6:22 am
In its controversial ruling in Case C-530/12, OHIM v National Lottery Commission [extensively reported by the IPKat here],the focus was on the probative value of national law: does it need to be considered by OHIM and by the General Court as a matter of fact or as a matter of law? [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 12:00 am by Nico Cordes
" by Bernard Spragg obtained via Flickr under Public Domain Mark 1.0. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 1:45 am
Now here's a Court of First Instance appeal on a Community trade mark matter that was first posted in Spanish only: it's asunto Tâ€â [read post]
6 Jan 2022, 12:21 am by Eleonora Rosati
The General Court gives lipstick shape mark a French kissGuerlain v EUIPO Case T-488/20 EU General Court (July 2021) Shape marks haven’t fared well in Retromark coverage over the years. [read post]