5 Cited authorities
In re Pacer Technology
338 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2003) Cited 47 times 1 Legal AnalysesNo. 02-1602. DECIDED: August 4, 2003. Appeal from the Court of Appeals, Gajarsa, Circuit Judge. Thomas E. Schatzel, Law Offices of Thomas E. Schatzel, of Los Gatos, California, argued for appellant. Raymond T. Chen, Associate Solicitor, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Arlington, Virginia, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were John M. Whealan, Solicitor; and Cynthia C. Lynch, Associate Solicitor. Before LOURIE, GAJARSA, and LINN, Circuit Judges. GAJARSA
Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Group
637 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2011) Cited 27 times 3 Legal AnalysesConsidering "corporate studies tracking awareness of the CITIBANK mark"
Vornado, Inc. v. Breuer Electric Mfg. Co.
390 F.2d 724 (C.C.P.A. 1968) Cited 10 timesHolding that any "Vornado" mark is infringing even though it does not have the particular logo Vornado puts on all its goods in commerce
Denney v. Elizabeth Arden Sales Corporation
263 F.2d 347 (C.C.P.A. 1959) Cited 7 timesPatent Appeal No. 6410. February 5, 1959. Mock Blum, New York City (Asher Blum, New York City, and Charles R. Allen, Jr., Washington, D.C., of counsel), for appellant. Howard A. Rosenberg, New York City (William R. Liberman, New York City, of counsel), for appellee. Before WORLEY, Acting Chief Judge, and RICH and MARTIN, Judges. MARTIN, Judge. This appeal is from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents, speaking through the Assistant Commissioner, affirming the decision of the Examiner of Interferences
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,595 times 273 Legal AnalysesGranting 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"