Dina DiCenso and Eight of Swords, LLC v. Dave Wallin

11 Cited authorities

  1. 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.”
  2. Del Tabaco v. Gen. Cigar Co.

    753 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2014)   Cited 16 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appellant demonstrated entitlement to a "statutory cause of action" under the Lanham Act
  3. Application of Deister Concentrator Company

    289 F.2d 496 (C.C.P.A. 1961)   Cited 67 times
    Rejecting the need to consider advertising "gimmicks" designed to acquaint the public with a mark that is incapable of acquiring secondary meaning
  4. Jewelers Vigilance Comm. v. Ullenberg Corp.

    823 F.2d 490 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 24 times
    Finding a “real interest” in a mark's registration can be shown “without proprietary rights in the mark or without asserting that it has a right or has an interest in using the alleged mark”
  5. Holiday Inn v. Holiday Inns, Inc.

    534 F.2d 312 (C.C.P.A. 1976)   Cited 25 times
    Holding that the USPTO had properly limited a national chain's marks to a particular geographic area on the basis of a district court's judgment to that effect
  6. In re Wella A.G

    787 F.2d 1549 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 9 times

    Appeal No. 85-2397. April 1, 1986. Bruce E. Lilling, Lilling Greenspan, White Plains, N.Y., argued, for appellant. Helen R. Wendel, Trademark Examining Atty., U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Arlington, Va., argued, for appellee. With her on brief were Joseph F. Nakamura, Sol. and Fred E. McKelvey, Deputy Sol. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before FRIEDMAN, DAVIS and NIES, Circuit Judges. FRIEDMAN, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from

  7. Chien Ming Huang v. Tzu Wei Chen Food Co.

    849 F.2d 1458 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 4 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trademark is void when the application was filed in the name of an entity that did not own the mark.
  8. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,911 times   126 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark
  9. Rule 902 - Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating

    Fed. R. Evid. 902   Cited 2,231 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Allowing authentication of domestic records of regularly conducted activity "by a certification of the custodian or another qualified person"
  10. Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1064   Cited 926 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services
  11. 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"