§

Cell Thera-peutics, Inc.

EX (T.T.A.B. Aug. 19, 2003)
Cell Thera-peutics, Inc.

4 Cited authorities

  1. In re Nett Designs, Inc.

    236 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 28 times
    Finding that prior registrations of marks including the term ULTIMATE "do not conclusively rebut the Board's finding that ULTIMATE is descriptive in the context of this mark"

  2. Magic Wand, Inc. v. RDB, Inc.

    940 F.2d 638 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 32 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that the Lanham Act is clear "that the relevant public for a genericness determination is the purchasing or consuming public"

  3. In re the American Fertility Society

    188 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 22 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an earlier precedential decision is binding precedent on later panels

  4. In re Montrachet S.A

    878 F.2d 375 (Fed. Cir. 1989)   Cited 5 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 89-1114. June 30, 1989. John J. McGlew, McGlew Tuttle, P.C., New York City, argued for appellant. Nancy Slutter, Associate Sol., Office of the Sol., Arlington, Va., argued for appellee. With her on the brief was Fred E. McKelvey, Sol. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, SKELTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. Appellant Montrachet S.A., a French company, appeals the decision of