Daimler-Chrysler AG

10 Cited authorities

G. Heileman Brewing Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
873 F.2d 985 (7th Cir. 1989) Cited 121 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "L.A." was a descriptive abbreviation for the descriptive words "low alcohol" for beer and no secondary meaning was acquired
Anheuser-Busch Inc. v. Stroh Brewery Co.
750 F.2d 631 (8th Cir. 1984) Cited 60 times
Holding "L.A." suggestive of low alcohol beer
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"
King-Seeley Thermos Co. v. Aladdin Industries
321 F.2d 577 (2d Cir. 1963) Cited 95 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that to determine whether trademark is generic, a court must determine the "principal significance of the word . . . its indication of the nature or class of an article, rather than an indication of its origin."
Application of Abcor Development Corp.
588 F.2d 811 (C.C.P.A. 1978) Cited 36 times 2 Legal Analyses
In Abcor, the question before the court was whether applicant's alleged mark (GASBADGE) was "merely descriptive" within the meaning of § 2(e)(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).
In re Gyulay
820 F.2d 1216 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 14 times 1 Legal Analyses
Stating that the Board did not err in affirming the examiner's prima facie case that the mark was merely descriptive
Donald F. Duncan, Inc. v. Royal Tops Mfg. Co.
343 F.2d 655 (7th Cir. 1965) Cited 40 times
Relying on an expert linguist's testimony that supported holding that "yo-yo" was a generic term
American Thermos Prod. Co. v. Aladdin Indus., Inc.
207 F. Supp. 9 (D. Conn. 1962) Cited 31 times
Addressing the "Thermos Survey" which asks participants how they would identify a particular product given that it performs certain functions, in an effort to identify if the name of the product is generic
G.T. Schjeldahl, Pack. M. D. v. L. Lodge 1680
393 F.2d 502 (1st Cir. 1968) Cited 22 times
No. 7032. April 12, 1968. Robert J. Cotton, Boston, Mass., with whom Morris L. Deutsch and Schneider, Bronstein, Wolbarsht Deutsch, Boston, Mass., were on the brief, for appellant. Richard A. Skolnik, Providence, R.I., with whom Julius C. Michaelson and Abedon, Michaelson, Stanzler Biener, Providence, R.I., were on the brief, for appellee. Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, McENTEE and COFFIN, Circuit Judges. ALDRICH, Chief Judge. This is an action under section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,607 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"

Daimler-Chrysler AG

10 Cited authorities

Holding that "L.A." was a descriptive abbreviation for the descriptive words "low alcohol" for beer and no secondary meaning was acquired

Holding "L.A." suggestive of low alcohol beer

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"

Holding that to determine whether trademark is generic, a court must determine the "principal significance of the word . . . its indication of the nature or class of an article, rather than an indication of its origin."

In Abcor, the question before the court was whether applicant's alleged mark (GASBADGE) was "merely descriptive" within the meaning of § 2(e)(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).

Stating that the Board did not err in affirming the examiner's prima facie case that the mark was merely descriptive

Relying on an expert linguist's testimony that supported holding that "yo-yo" was a generic term

Addressing the "Thermos Survey" which asks participants how they would identify a particular product given that it performs certain functions, in an effort to identify if the name of the product is generic

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"