§

Giorgio S.R.L.

No. 79141996 (T.T.A.B. Sep. 30, 2015)
Giorgio S.R.L.

7 Cited authorities

  1. 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"

  2. In re Fox

    702 F.3d 633 (Fed. Cir. 2012)   Cited 7 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Affirming refusal to register COCK SUCKER mark for lollipops

  3. In re Rath

    402 F.3d 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 9 times

    Nos. 04-1419, 04-1420, 75/753,445, 75/753,597. March 24, 2005. Roy S. Gordet, San Francisco, California, for appellant. John M. Whealan, Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Arlington, Virginia, for the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. With him on the brief were Cynthia C. Lynch and Nancy C. Slutter, Associate Solicitors. Of counsel on the brief were Lois E. Boland, Director, and Amy P. Cotton, Staff Attorney, Office of International Relations. Before

  4. In re Boulevard Entertainment, Inc.

    334 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 9 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Affirming refusal to register JACK–OFF marks

  5. In re Mavety Media Group Ltd.

    33 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 13 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that PTO failed to prove that term was scandalous and thus unregistrable; PTO relied on dictionary definition of disputed term, but dictionary provided alternative definitions; proof failed because of "the absence of evidence as to which of these definitions the substantial composite [of consumers] would choose"

  6. Section 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 4,398 times   30 Legal Analyses
    In § 2 cases under the Sherman Act, as in § 7 cases under the Clayton Act (Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325) there may be submarkets that are separate economic entities.

  7. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,585 times   271 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"