IP Intelligence

JANUARY 4, 2022

If you desire to register a service mark asserting use that is preparatory for the rendering of your services, your application will fail in the U.S. Instead, the services must be actually rendered in connection with the mark for a registration to be granted. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Suuberg , at p.

Service Mark 52

Service Mark Registration Trademark Advertising 52

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 4, 2022

If you desire to register a service mark asserting use that is preparatory for the rendering of your services, your application will fail in the U.S. Instead, the services must be actually rendered in connection with the mark for a registration to be granted. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). ” Id.

Service Mark 52

Service Mark Registration Trademark Advertising 52

43(B)log

OCTOBER 4, 2021

Vining, 2021 WL 4344891, No. Defendants' letter allegedly copied text from LStar Trademark infringement: LStar never specified what its trademarks or service marks were. Not every word on a label or ad is a mark. LStar Development Gp., 5:20-CV-184-FL (E.D.N.C. LStar didn’t plead its own trademark use. commerce.”

False Advertising 59

False Advertising Advertising Advertising Contracts 59

43(B)log

SEPTEMBER 16, 2021

PureThink, LLC, 2021 WL 2483778, No. May 18, 2021) Neo4j specializes in graph database management systems. Summary judgment granted on state and federal false advertising claims. False designation of origin: Yep. Neo4j, Inc. 5:18-cv-07182-EJD (N.D. I still don’t know what that means, but ok.]

False Advertising 64

False Advertising Advertising Advertising Licensing 64

43(B)log

OCTOBER 24, 2023

The Giant agreement provided that the service mark “JADE” would be held exclusively by the Jade Group, that at no time would more than one member of the Jade Group appear on a non-Jade Group recording, and that no additional members would be added to the Jade Group without Giant’s consent.

False Advertising 59

False Advertising Ownership Service Mark Advertising 59

Indiana Intellectual Property Law

AUGUST 18, 2021

Because several of the getGo® Marks have been in use continuously since at least 2003, and Plaintiffs apparently complied with all further requirements, they are incontestable under 15 U.S.C. Further, Giant Eagle claims it has spent millions of dollars to advertise and promote its services using the getGo® Marks.

Trademark 52

Trademark Service Mark Registration Advertising 52