§

Cheerleader Pub and Grill, Inc. v. Private Label and The Bugarie Group LLC (joined as defendants)

No. 91216816 (T.T.A.B. May. 7, 2018)
Cheerleader Pub and Grill, Inc. v. Private Label and The Bugarie Group LLC (joined as defendants)

21 Cited authorities

  1. Star Scientific v. R.J. Tobacco

    537 F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2008)   Cited 396 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that intent may be proven circumstantially, "[b]ut such evidence must still be clear and convincing, and inferences drawn from lesser evidence cannot satisfy the deceptive intent requirement"

  2. Kingsdown Medical Consultants v. Hollister

    863 F.2d 867 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 554 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding even “ ‘gross negligence’ does not of itself justify an inference of intent to deceive”

  3. 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

  4. Herbko Intern., Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc.

    308 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 2002)   Cited 45 times
    Explaining that proprietary rights are necessary to show priority of use when petitioning for cancellation under section 2(d)

  5. 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.”

  6. Torres v. Cantine Torresella S.R.L

    808 F.2d 46 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 52 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Affirming TTAB's cancellation of trademark for fraudulently obtaining registration

  7. 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

  8. 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"

  9. T.A.B. Systems v. Pactel Teletrac

    77 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 1996)   Cited 29 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that press releases, slide show presentations, brochures, and news articles were insufficient to establish analogous use trademark rights where the evidence presented did not support an inference that "a substantial share of the consuming public had been reached" or that "the consuming public came to identify" the mark with defendant's services

  10. King Automotive v. Speedy Muffler King

    667 F.2d 1008 (C.C.P.A. 1981)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Appeal No. 81-566. December 17, 1981. Frank H. Foster, Columbus, Ohio, for appellant. John V. Sobesky and Ernest A. Beutler, Jr., Birmingham, Mich., for appellee. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, MILLER and NIES, Judges. BALDWIN, Judge. This is an appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (board) of a decision granting appellee's motion to dismiss appellant's amended

  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. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,886 times   126 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

  13. 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"

  14. Section 1060 - Assignment

    15 U.S.C. § 1060   Cited 190 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Requiring assignments of federal trademark registrations to be "by instruments in writing"

  15. Section 1063 - Opposition to registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1063   Cited 147 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Identifying "dilution by blurring ... under section 1125(c) as a permissible grounds for opposition to a registration"

  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 2.56 - Specimens

    37 C.F.R. § 2.56   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) An application under section 1(a) of the Act, an amendment to allege use under § 2.76 , a statement of use under § 2.88 , an affidavit or declaration of continued use or excusable nonuse under § 2.160 , or an affidavit or declaration of use or excusable nonuse under § 7.36 must include one specimen per class showing the mark as actually used in commerce on or in connection with the goods or services identified. When requested by the Office as reasonably necessary to proper examination, additional

  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 3.16 - Assignability of trademarks prior to filing of an allegation of use

    37 C.F.R. § 3.16   1 Legal Analyses

    Before an allegation of use under either 15 U.S.C. 1051(c) or 15 U.S.C. 1051(d) is filed, an applicant may only assign an application to register a mark under 15 U.S.C. 1051(b) to a successor to the applicant's business, or portion of the business to which the mark pertains, if that business is ongoing and existing. 37 C.F.R. §3.16 64 FR 48926, Sept. 8, 1999 Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations. Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts