Confusing - Judgment Search Results

The Himalaya Drug Company, Mumbai Vs. Lalitkumar Ratilal Fozdar and Ot ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... rival marks and the likelihood of their causing deception or confusion it would be appropriate to refer to few relevant provisions ..... of the registered medical practitioner and therefore chances of deception and confusion are eliminated is not very credible as has been observed ..... application for registration it is likely to cause deception and confusion 12 now coming to the respondent no 1s claim to .....

Prestige Housewares India Limited, Bangalore and Another Vs. Gupta Lig ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... trade connection or an association with the applicants such use besides causing deception or confusion amounts to infringement of applicants registered trade mark nos 141602 and 377158b under section ..... other kitchen utensils under deceptively similar trade mark pre stage in delhi causing considerable confusion and deception of the trade and public and the said information prompted the applicant .....

Uttecht Vs. Brown

Court: US Supreme Court

..... the trial court exceeded this discretion in excusing juror z indeed the transcript shows considerable confusion on the part of the juror amounting to substantial impairment the supreme court of ..... supreme court deemed juror z substantially impaired because he initially demonstrated a misunderstanding of or confusion about the relevant law that would also be an insufficient basis to support his .....

M/S. Sony Corporation, Japan Vs. M/S Rajesh Synthetic and Another

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... in connection with the goods for which registration is sought it is likely to cause confusion or cause deception we accordingly reverse the second respondents conclusion that there is no ..... likelihood of confusion and deception amongst the purchasing public 11 the affidavit of mr takahashi has annexed amongst .....

Ahmed Oomerbhoy and anr. Vs. Shri Gautam Tank and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 146(2008)DLT774; LC2008(2)105; 2008(36)PTC193(Del)

..... goods thereforee there is no trademark consequently there is no confusion among public and trade and plaintiffs are also left with ..... defendants and there is added matter sufficient to avoid any confusion or deception thereforee the plaintiff is not entitled for any ..... writing address on the product is not sufficient to avoid confusion or deception created on account of trademark super postman used .....

Fdc Limited and ors. Vs. Sanjeev Khandelwal and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: LC2007(3)139; 2007(35)PTC436(Mad)

..... of both the marks are similar which is capable of causing confusion among the general public the plaintiffs and the defendants goods are ..... important that great care be taken to prevent any possibility of confusion in the use of trade marks the test as to whether ..... or not the medicines are designed for similar ailments prevention of confusion and mistakes in medicines is too vital to be trifled with .....

McDonald's Corporation repr. by Its Attorney Ms. Shiela M. Lehr and Mc ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007KAR3346; 2007(5)KarLJ638; LC2007(3)153; 2008(37)PTC247(Karn)

..... the same in all prominent places of its business to avoid confusion and deception since the defendant turned down such a request ..... any criteria for determining what is likely to deceive or cause confusion therefore every case must depend on its own particular facts ..... tests applied for determining what is likely to deceive or cause confusion on an application to register the registrar or an opponent .....

S. Sudhakar and Vs. S.S.P. Durairaj (Firm) and

Court: Chennai

Reported in: LC2007(2)247; 2008(36)PTC150(Mad)

..... applicants 2 for the sake of brevity and also to avoid confusion in referring to the respective parties the plaintiffs are referred ..... and the respondents further the public will not be deceived or confused on seeing the label of the applicants therefore the learned ..... the applicants it is found that nobody will be deceived or confused with the registered trade mark of the applicants the offending .....

Canon Kabushiki Kaisha Vs. B. Mahajan and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2007(97)DRJ140; LC2007(2)375; 2007(35)PTC265(Del)

..... registration of the mark in question by the defendant is not a defense deception and confusion are relevant considerations to consider the grant and continuance of injunction identical reproduction of the ..... products of the plaintiffs and the defendants were similar and thereforee there was likelihood of confusion 31 the defendants have also cited various precedents in support of their case in intel .....

Sempra Metals Limited (formerly Metallgesellschaft Limited) (Responden ...

Court: House of Lords

..... legal principle will in my opinion be the result 133 a confusion between compensatory claims and restitutionary claims seems to me apparent ..... it is hard to make progress through that sort of confusion there is a clear need for a vocabulary generally understood ..... law s attitude to interest was shaped not by conceptual confusion but by policy driven concerns however debatable regarding interest which .....