3 Cited authorities
Octocom Systems v. Houston Computer Services
918 F.2d 937 (Fed. Cir. 1990) Cited 28 timesNo. 90-1196. November 2, 1990. Brian M. Dingman, Law Offices of Joseph S. Iandiorio, Waltham, Mass., argued for appellant. With him on the brief was Joseph S. Iandiorio. J. Paul Williamson, Arnold, White Durkee, Arlington, Va., argued for appellee. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before NIES, Chief Judge, ARCHER and CLEVENGER, Circuit Judges. NIES, Chief Judge. Octocom Systems, Inc. (OSI), appeals from the final decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Application of Abcor Development Corp.
588 F.2d 811 (C.C.P.A. 1978) Cited 36 times 2 Legal AnalysesIn 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).
Application of Allen Electric Equip. Co.
458 F.2d 1404 (C.C.P.A. 1972) Cited 1 timesPatent Appeal No. 8721. May 18, 1972. Albert L. Ely, Jr., Cleveland, Ohio (Ely, Golrick Flynn), Cleveland, Ohio, attorneys of record, for appellant. S. Wm. Cochran, Washington, D.C., for the Commissioner of Patents. Jere W. Sears, Washington, D.C., A.D. Hooks, of counsel. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN, LANE, Judges, and CLARK, Justice (Ret.), United States Supreme Court, sitting by designation. BALDWIN, Judge. This is an appeal from the Trademark Trial