4 Cited authorities
In re Advertising Marketing Development
821 F.2d 614 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 21 timesHolding that advertising firm had used THE NOW GENERATION as a mark for its promotional services based on letterhead naming itself as the "creators, producers and suppliers of THE NOW GENERATION sales promotion services" as well as "postcard and magazine advertising specimens to the same effect"
In re Staffney v. Johnson Controls, W.C. No
W.C. No. 4-695-317 (Colo. Ind. App. Sep. 17, 2007)W.C. No. 4-695-317. September 17, 2007. FINAL ORDER The claimant seeks review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Harr (ALJ) mailed on March 9, 2007, that denied and dismissed the claimant's claim for compensation. We affirm. A hearing was held on the issues of the compensability of the claim and whether the claimant proved that he was entitled to medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits. Following the hearing the ALJ entered findings of fact that for the purposes of this order
Application of Universal Oil Products Co.
476 F.2d 653 (C.C.P.A. 1973) Cited 3 timesPatent Appeal Nos. 8906 and 8933. April 19, 1973. John T. Lanahan, Des Plaines, Ill., of record, for appellant; Sidney W. Russell, Arlington, Va., of counsel. S. Wm. Cochran, Washington, D.C., for the Commissioner of Patents; John W. Dewhirst, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Appeal from the Patent Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, RICH, BALDWIN and LANE, Judges, and ALMOND, Senior Judge. RICH, Judge. These consolidated appeals are from decisions of the Patent Office
Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter
15 U.S.C. § 1127 Cited 2,953 times 96 Legal AnalysesGranting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark