§

American Polo Association, LLC v. Elizabeth Scripps

No. 92066032 (T.T.A.B. Aug. 1, 2018)
American Polo Association, LLC v. Elizabeth Scripps

19 Cited authorities

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 220,686 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  2. In re Bose Corp.

    580 F.3d 1240 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 172 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an applicant commits fraud when it knowingly makes false, material representations of fact with an intent to deceive the PTO

  3. Ritchie v. Simpson

    170 F.3d 1092 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 48 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding “real interest” is shown by “a direct and personal stake in the outcome” or a “legitimate personal interest.”

  4. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Mahajan

    923 F. Supp. 2d 1133 (N.D. Ill. 2013)   Cited 17 times
    Holding that the Bierman Court's FTCA analysis survived O'Melveny

  5. Del Tabaco v. Gen. Cigar Co.

    753 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2014)   Cited 14 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appellant demonstrated entitlement to a "statutory cause of action" under the Lanham Act

  6. Rivard v. Linville

    133 F.3d 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1998)   Cited 23 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding evidence must be more than a mere denial of an intent to abandon

  7. Lloyd's Food Products, Inc. v. Eli's, Inc.

    987 F.2d 766 (Fed. Cir. 1993)   Cited 18 times
    Holding that third-party evidence should not be disregarded in evaluating the strength of a mark for purposes of determining the likelihood of confusion

  8. In re Bush Bros. Co.

    884 F.2d 569 (Fed. Cir. 1989)   Cited 16 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 89-1071. September 1, 1989. Edward G. Fenwick, Mason, Fenwick Lawrence, Washington, D.C., submitted for appellant. With him on the brief was Brian D. Anderson. Albin F. Drost, Associate Sol., Office of the Sol., of Arlington, Va., submitted for appellee. With him on the brief was Fred E. McKelvey, Sol. Appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial Appeal Board. Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, BENNETT, Senior Circuit Judge, and BISSELL, Circuit Judge. PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge

  9. Olde Tyme Foods, Inc. v. Roundy's, Inc.

    961 F.2d 200 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 12 times
    Stating that "[a]s to strength of a mark . . . [third-party] registration evidence may not be given any weight . . . [because they are] not evidence of what happens in the market place"

  10. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 336,252 times   161 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  11. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 94,377 times   92 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

  12. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,025 times   334 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  13. Rule 34 - Producing Documents, Electronically Stored Information, and Tangible Things, or Entering onto Land, for Inspection and Other Purposes

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 34   Cited 13,658 times   154 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the rules related to electronic discovery were "not meant to create a routine right of direct access to a party's electronic information system, although such access may be justified in some circumstances."

  14. Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 33   Cited 11,262 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Rule 30(b)

  15. Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 3,016 times   98 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

  16. Section 1054 - Collective marks and certification marks registrable

    15 U.S.C. § 1054   Cited 45 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing "nations, States, municipalities, and the like" to register collective marks

  17. Section 2.122 - Matters in evidence

    37 C.F.R. § 2.122   Cited 23 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that in inter partes proceeding, "[t]he allegation in an application for registration, or in a registration, of a date of use is not evidence on behalf of the applicant or registrant" but, rather, "a date of use of a mark must be established by competent evidence"

  18. Section 2.76 - Amendment to allege use

    37 C.F.R. § 2.76   Cited 3 times
    Requiring three specimens to support the declared date of the first use of the mark in commerce

  19. Section 2.126 - Form of submissions to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

    37 C.F.R. § 2.126   Cited 1 times

    (a) Submissions must be made to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board via ESTTA. (1) Text in an electronic submission must be filed in at least 11-point type and double-spaced. (2) Exhibits pertaining to an electronic submission must be made electronically as an attachment to the submission and must be clear and legible. (b) In the event that ESTTA is unavailable due to technical problems, or when extraordinary circumstances are present, submissions may be filed in paper form. All submissions in paper