Park 'N Fly, Inc. v. Dollar Park & Fly, Inc.

Holding that an incontestable mark cannot be challenged as merely descriptive

Matal v. Tam

Holding law prohibiting "trademarks like . . . 'Down with racists,' 'Down with sexists,' 'Down with homophobes' " was not narrowly tailored to interest in preventing disparaging language from disrupting the orderly flow of commerce

Coach Services, Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC

Holding that it is the opposer's burden to prove fame of its mark

In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.

Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"

Palm Bay Imp. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin

Finding similarity between "VEUVE ROYALE" and "VEUVE CLICQUOT" because "VEUVE ... remains a ‘prominent feature’ as the first word in the mark and the first word to appear on the label"

Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.

Finding similarity between LASER for golf clubs and golf balls and LASERSWING for golf practice devices, and noting that "the term ‘swing’ is both common and descriptive" and therefore "may be given little weight in reaching a conclusion on likelihood of confusion"

Converse, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n

Advising that "both Converse's use and the use by its competitors" must be considered

Tone Bros., Inc. v. Sysco Corp.

Considering secondary meaning survey conducted in 1990 even though allegedly infringing product entered the market in 1998

Juice Generation, Inc. v. GS Enterprises LLC

Determining that TTAB failed to adequately account for evidence of "a fair number of third-party uses" of similar marks by discounting the evidence for lack of "specifics regarding the extent of sales or promotional efforts surrounding the third-party marks"

L.D. Kichler Co. v. Davoil, Inc.

Holding that “any” use by third parties does not preclude an applicant's use from being substantially exclusive

Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

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"

Section 1063 - Opposition to registration

Identifying "dilution by blurring ... under section 1125(c) as a permissible grounds for opposition to a registration"

Section 1141f - Effect of filing a request for extension of protection of an international registration to the United States

Requiring a declaration of "bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce"

Section 1141h - Examination of and opposition to request for extension of protection; notification of refusal

Section 2.122 - Matters in evidence

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"