§

Australian Therapeutic Supplies Pty. Ltd. v. Naked TM, LLC

No. 92056381 (T.T.A.B. Dec. 21, 2018)
Australian Therapeutic Supplies Pty. Ltd. v. Naked TM, LLC

17 Cited authorities

  1. Official Committee v. R.F. Lafferty Co.

    267 F.3d 340 (3d Cir. 2001)   Cited 371 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Pennsylvania's Supreme Court would recognize a "deepening insolvency" cause of action

  2. D N Bank v. U.S.

    331 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 42 times
    Explaining that "the holding in each other case [i.e. cases in which we identified a contract] was based on a showing that the thrift involved and the Bank Board had explicitly agreed to be bound"

  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. Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc. v. Barram

    226 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 34 times
    Upholding damages for breach of transcription contract without evidence of specific proceedings the reporters would have transcribed but for the breach

  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. Lipton Industries, Inc. v. Ralston Purina

    670 F.2d 1024 (C.C.P.A. 1982)   Cited 58 times
    Holding that admission contained in an answer was binding, despite the fact that it was made "on information and belief"

  7. Selva & Sons, Inc. v. Nina Footwear, Inc.

    705 F.2d 1316 (Fed. Cir. 1983)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that challenger established standing under § 1064 notwithstanding the parties’ written agreement not to challenge each other's registration or each other's rights to use and sell goods under the mark

  8. Otto Roth Co. v. Universal Foods Corp.

    640 F.2d 1317 (C.C.P.A. 1981)   Cited 20 times
    Recognizing importance of "free use of the language" in commercial speech context

  9. Wells Cargo, Inc. v. Wells Cargo, Inc.

    606 F.2d 961 (C.C.P.A. 1979)   Cited 9 times

    Appeal No. 78-514. October 11, 1979. William D. Stokes, Arlington, Va., attorney of record, for appellant. Henry C. Bunsow, San Francisco, Cal., attorney of record, for appellee; Stephen S. Townsend, San Francisco, Cal., of counsel. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, RICH, BALDWIN and MILLER, Judges, and WATSON, Judge. The Honorable James L. Watson, Judge, United States Customs Court, sitting by designation. MARKEY, Chief Judge

  10. Danskin, Inc. v. Dan River, Inc.

    498 F.2d 1386 (C.C.P.A. 1974)   Cited 8 times
    Concluding that a petitioner could not, as a matter of law, seek cancellation of a mark because it had entered a prior settlement agreement with the registrant to "not oppose or petition to cancel directly or indirectly any registration" by that registrant

  11. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,600 times   274 Legal Analyses
    Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"

  12. Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1064   Cited 918 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services

  13. Section 1067 - Interference, opposition, and proceedings for concurrent use registration or for cancellation; notice; Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

    15 U.S.C. § 1067   Cited 49 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring the TTAB "to determine and decide the respective rights of registration" when an opposition to registration has been filed

  14. Section 2.116 - Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

    37 C.F.R. § 2.116   Cited 50 times
    Making the federal rules of civil procedure generally applicable in TTAB proceedings

  15. Section 2.120 - Discovery

    37 C.F.R. § 2.120   Cited 23 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Providing that the TTAB "in its discretion, may refuse to consider the additional written disclosures or responses"

  16. 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"

  17. Section 2.123 - Trial testimony in inter partes cases

    37 C.F.R. § 2.123   Cited 10 times

    (a) (1) The testimony of witnesses in inter partes cases may be submitted in the form of an affidavit or a declaration pursuant to § 2.20 and in conformance with the Federal Rules of Evidence, filed during the proffering party's testimony period, subject to the right of any adverse party to elect to take and bear the expense of oral cross-examination of that witness as provided under paragraph (c) of this section if such witness is within the jurisdiction of the United States, or conduct cross-examination