Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Alfacell Corp. v. Anticancer, Inc.

No. 92032202 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 22, 2004)
Alfacell Corp. v. Anticancer, Inc.

14 Cited authorities

  1. Kos Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Andrx Corp.

    369 F.3d 700 (3d Cir. 2004)   Cited 1,099 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “ ‘trademark infringement amounts to irreparable injury as a matter of law’ ” (quoting S & R Corp. v. Jiffy Lube Int'l, Inc., 968 F.2d 371, 378 (3d Cir.1992))

  2. A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Const. Co.

    960 F.2d 1020 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 661 times   37 Legal Analyses
    Holding that equitable estoppel is a cognizable defense against patent infringement

  3. Checkpoint Sys. v. Check Point Software Tech

    269 F.3d 270 (3d Cir. 2001)   Cited 233 times
    Holding that the District Court did not clearly err in finding that parties' products were unrelated even though both fell under the broader category of "corporate security" where the plaintiff focused on physical security and the defendant focused on information and computer security

  4. State Contract Eng. v. Condotte America

    346 F.3d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 116 times
    Finding issue of material fact precluding summary judgment given conflicting expert testimony as to whether a prior art reference was analogous

  5. In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 195 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"

  6. Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.

    222 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 76 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding similarity between LASER for golf clubs and golf balls and LASERSWING for golf practice devices, and noting that "the term ‘swing’ is both common and descriptive" and therefore "may be given little weight in reaching a conclusion on likelihood of confusion"

  7. National Cable Television v. Am. Cinema

    937 F.2d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 83 times
    Rejecting contention that “American Cinema Editors” did not have trademark rights in the acronym “ACE”

  8. Bridgestone/Firestone Research, Inc. v. Automobile Club de l'Ouest de la France

    245 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 52 times
    Holding that a petition for cancellation of a registered trademark was barred by the doctrine of laches based on the petitioner's constructive knowledge

  9. Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America

    970 F.2d 874 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 39 times
    Finding similarity between "CENTURY 21" and "CENTURY LIFE OF AMERICA" in part because "consumers must first notice th[e] identical lead word"

  10. Weiss Associates, Inc. v. HRL Associates, Inc.

    902 F.2d 1546 (Fed. Cir. 1990)   Cited 21 times
    Affirming denial of registration of "TMM" mark for software because: it was likely to be confused with a registered mark "TMS," also used for software; "[t]he marks sound alike and look alike; and "[t]he products are very similar and directly compete."

  11. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 96,600 times   95 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint