Search for: "Sound Testing, Inc"
Results 61 - 80
of 1,628
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Mar 2016, 3:34 am
"As to pronunciation, Respondent's letter "T" sounds nothing like TERRAFAZIONE ITALIA COFFEE [Doh! [read post]
26 Feb 2014, 3:33 am
However, the Board observed, customers for registrant's goods may view the applied-for mark as an update of the registrant's mark for its "Fruit Candy" line of products.In sum, the Board found the marks to be similar in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. [read post]
28 Oct 2014, 2:38 am
Anthropologie, Inc. and Urban Outfitters Wholesale, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 6:34 am
(citing Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. [read post]
1 May 2011, 7:52 am
Laurelbrook Sanitarium and School, Inc. [read post]
24 Nov 2014, 7:00 am
As the first portion of the test is not met, the [trade-marks] cannot be found misdescriptive. [read post]
6 May 2011, 2:05 am
Houdini, Inc., Opposition No. 91188001 (April 22, 2011) [not precedential].The record included dictionary definitions of "fog," "cloud," and "bank. [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 3:20 am
Of course, the proper test is not a side-by-side comparison. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 12:00 am
It sounded intriguing. [read post]
11 Jan 2007, 10:06 am
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. that its often-expressed "substantially advance" formulation sounds in due process, and thus should be rejected as an appropriate takings test. [read post]
30 Dec 2014, 7:30 am
Rose Art Industries, Inc., 22 USPQ2d at 1456 (emphasis in the original).With regard to sound, since the involved marks are not common words, there is no correct way to pronounce them. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 3:14 am
In re Barrie House Coffee Co., Inc., Serial No. 76695202 (April 11, 2011) [not precedential]. [read post]
21 Dec 2012, 12:27 am
They can instead be actively monitoring and testing transactions to confirm compliance. [read post]
8 Sep 2020, 7:01 am
As we explained here, AB5 codified and expanded the “ABC” test adopted by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
16 May 2013, 4:43 pm
Heckethorn Products, Inc., Opposition No. 91179460 (May 2, 2013) [not precedential].The Board noted that, in comparing marks for identical goods, "it is proper to consider their appearance, sound and meaning. *** But a combination of all three factors need not necessarily exist, and an opposition to registration may be sustained if the marks are identical or so similar in meaning that confusion as to source is deemed likely." [read post]
10 May 2011, 2:25 am
" In re Gardenlife, Inc., Serial No. 77709903 (April 14, 2011) [not precedential].The Board found the marks to be substantially similar in appearance, identical in sound, suggestive of the same idea, and highly similar in commercial impression. [read post]
13 May 2020, 4:39 am
In re Nett Designs, Inc., 236 F.3d 1339, 57 USPQ2d 1564, 1566 (Fed. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 6:13 am
We can only speculate at this point, but that doesn't sound like a sustainable business model. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 2:51 am
In re El Galan, Inc., Serial No. 86961428 (February 1, 2018) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge George C. [read post]
27 Mar 2024, 12:23 am
Then I'm issuing a press release and going on the networks -- Fox News sounds good to me too -- and am telling everyone "I want to emphasize that there's a cure for cancer. [read post]
