Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[7] "As a general rule, a prior user of a mark is entitled to a registration covering the entire United States limited only to the extent that the subsequent user can establish that no likelihood of confusion exists and that it has concurrent rights in its actual area of use, plus its area of natural expansion." [17]
The Trademark Act of 1905 imports the rules of practice and procedure that govern appeals of patent applications, and so authorizes unsuccessful trademark applicants to obtain a remedy by bill in equity, as the Revised Statutes provide to unsuccessful patent applicants. Prestonettes, Inc. v. Coty: 264 U.S. 359: April 7, 1924: Substantive: Right ...
In the United States, an Office action is a document written by an examiner in a patent or trademark examination procedure and mailed to an applicant [1] for a patent or trademark. The expression is used in many jurisdictions. Formally, the "O" is supposed to be capitalized, since it refers to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. [2]
A California man’s chances of trademarking “Trump too small” may be gone. The Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared inclined to side with the Biden Justice Department in rejecting the ...
A trademark is a word, phrase, or logo that identifies the source of goods or services. [1] Trademark law protects a business' commercial identity or brand by discouraging other businesses from adopting a name or logo that is "confusingly similar" to an existing trademark. The goal is to allow consumers to easily identify the producers of goods ...
Long title: An Act to make new provision for registered trade marks, implementing Council Directive No. 89/104/EEC of 21st December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks; to make provision in connection with Council Regulation (EC) No. 40/94 of 20th December 1993 on the Community trade mark; to give effect to the Madrid Protocol Relating to the International ...
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Vidal v. Elster, 602 U.S. 286, is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with 15 U.S.C. § 1052, a provision of the Lanham Act regarding trademarks using the name of living individuals without their consent. The court decided that the provision does not violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. [1] [2]