Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 221 - 240
of 21,419
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jul 2020, 11:37 am
Patent and Trademark Office v. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 7:35 am
The Federal Circuit specifically declined to address this question last year in Stauffer v. [read post]
16 May 2018, 11:03 am
See Quality Inns Intern., Inc. v. [read post]
13 Sep 2013, 2:55 pm
In Cheah v. [read post]
2 Feb 2020, 11:28 pm
This provision requires applicants to state that the trade mark is being used, or that the applicant has a bona fide intention to use the trade mark. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 6:32 am
Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 17 (2005), quoting United States v. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 5:59 am
The court sua sponte dismissed plaintiff's qui tam false marking action for failure to state a claim following the enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. [read post]
31 Aug 2010, 5:36 am
Defendant's motion to stay plaintiff's qui tam false marking case pending the Federal Circuit's resolution of Stauffer v. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 3:01 am
McDonald’s Corporation v. [read post]
27 Aug 2014, 4:13 pm
Co. v. [read post]
10 Jul 2015, 2:14 am
Having duked the matter out in the United States Patents and Trademarks Office, and subsequently at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the matter has moved on to the District Court of Virginia, where the decision was handed down only a few days ago.Pro-Football Inc v Amanda Blackhorse et al. [read post]
25 Aug 2015, 10:55 am
By having in place different trade marks for the same product in different Member States the court held that there was an unjustified “artificial partitioning of the market” by the trade mark owner constituting a disguised restriction on trade. [read post]
29 Nov 2007, 5:13 am
In Arista v. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 12:24 pm
Infringement proceedings involving an EU trade mark must generally be brought before the courts of the member state in which a defendant is domiciled (Regulation 207/2009/EC, Article 97(1)). [read post]
21 Mar 2022, 2:46 am
These questions were recently answered in a ruling by the CJEU in the Globus v. [read post]
2 Jan 2019, 4:59 am
In doing so, the Supreme Court rejected the result of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Person's Co., Ltd. v. [read post]
21 Apr 2013, 3:20 pm
There again, the peculiarly interesting state of trade mark law in the United Kingdom and, not far beyond it, in the territory of the European Economic Area, might be closer to the cause. [read post]
13 May 2013, 7:43 am
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court recently decided State of Maine v. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 7:27 am
It will be difficult for a Cuban trade mark applicant who lives in the United States and who travels around to avoid being found to be a bad faith trade mark applicant, being a person with previous knowledge of all those trade marks. [read post]
26 Nov 2007, 2:16 am
Lutz Superdyne, Inc. v. [read post]
