Brooks Sports, Inc. v. Anta (China) Co., Ltd.

21 Cited authorities

  1. On-Line Careline, Inc. v. America Online

    229 F.3d 1080 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 76 times
    Applying Recot in analyzing the similarity of services
  2. Emergency One, Inc. v. American Fireeagle

    228 F.3d 531 (4th Cir. 2000)   Cited 66 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that three consecutive years of non-use of a mark creates a presumption of abandonment
  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. Stetson v. Howard D. Wolf Associates

    955 F.2d 847 (2d Cir. 1992)   Cited 50 times
    Deciding case despite trial court's application of erroneous legal standard where facts adequately supported result
  5. Cerveceria Centroamericana v. Cerveceria

    892 F.2d 1021 (Fed. Cir. 1989)   Cited 50 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in the absence of evidence of intent to resume use during the period of non-use, the TTAB "may conclude the registrant has . . . failed to rebut the presumption of abandonment," even when there is evidence of intent to resume after the period of nonuse
  6. Couture v. Playdom, Inc.

    778 F.3d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 12 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the offering of a service, without the actual provision of a service, is [in]sufficient to constitute use in commerce under Lanham Act § 45, 15 U.S.C. § 1127."
  7. Del Tabaco v. Gen. Cigar Co.

    753 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2014)   Cited 12 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appellant demonstrated entitlement to a "statutory cause of action" under the Lanham Act
  8. Lipton Industries, Inc. v. Ralston Purina

    670 F.2d 1024 (C.C.P.A. 1982)   Cited 55 times
    Holding that admission contained in an answer was binding, despite the fact that it was made "on information and belief"
  9. 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
  10. Lens.Com, Inc. v. 1–800 Contacts, Inc.

    686 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2012)   Cited 8 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Lens.com, the court found that the Lens.com software facilitated the customers' online ordering, providing customers an enhanced consumer experience that provided greater value to Lens.com's online retail services.
  11. Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 2,943 times   95 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark
  12. Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1064   Cited 882 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services
  13. Section 1069 - Application of equitable principles in inter partes proceedings

    15 U.S.C. § 1069   Cited 47 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing in the Lanham Act context that "[i]n all inter partes proceedings equitable principles of laches, estoppel, and acquiescence, where applicable may be considered and applied"
  14. Section 1151 - Purpose of chapter

    15 U.S.C. § 1151   Cited 8 times

    The purpose of this chapter is to make the results of technological research and development more readily available to industry and business, and to the general public, by clarifying and defining the functions and responsibilities of the Department of Commerce as a central clearinghouse for technical information which is useful to American industry and business. 15 U.S.C. § 1151 Sept. 9, 1950, ch. 936, §1, 64 Stat. 823.

  15. Section 2.122 - Matters in evidence

    37 C.F.R. § 2.122   Cited 22 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"