Gruma, S.A.B. de C.V., and Azteca Milling, L.P. v. Instamasa Sociedad Anonima

31 Cited authorities

Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Rainey
488 U.S. 153 (1988) Cited 758 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding a Navy aircraft accident investigative report was admissible
Abercrombie Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, Inc.
537 F.2d 4 (2d Cir. 1976) Cited 810 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that the term "Safari" is generic for the articles of clothing that comprise the "Safari suit" outfit
Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.
222 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2000) Cited 72 times 3 Legal Analyses
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"
Juice Generation, Inc. v. GS Enterprises LLC
794 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2015) Cited 28 times 2 Legal Analyses
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"
In re Bayer
488 F.3d 960 (Fed. Cir. 2007) Cited 39 times 2 Legal Analyses
Endorsing the use of internet evidence as admissible and competent evidence for evaluating a trademark
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.”
In re Nat. Data Corp.
753 F.2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1985) Cited 70 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a "likelihood of confusion cannot be predicated on dissection of a mark"
Duopross Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd.
695 F.3d 1247 (Fed. Cir. 2012) Cited 23 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that, although the Board may "ascertain the meaning and weight of each of the components that makes up the mark," it "ultimately must consider the mark as a whole and do so in the context of the goods or services at issue"
In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, Smith
828 F.2d 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 57 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding applicant's incontestable registration of a service mark for "cash management account" did not automatically entitle applicant to registration of that mark for broader financial services
Jack Wolfskin Ausrustung Fur Draussen GmbH & Co. KGAA v. New Millennium Sports, S.L.U.
797 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015) Cited 17 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Board erred in giving little weight to evidence of registered third-party marks in actual use
Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification
15 U.S.C. § 1051 Cited 3,806 times 124 Legal Analyses
Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark
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"
Rule 106 - Remainder of or Related Statements
Fed. R. Evid. 106 Cited 1,064 times 10 Legal Analyses
Providing that a party is entitled to the admission of any part of a recorded statement which ought, in fairness, be considered contemporaneously with the portion of a statement excerpted by an adverse party
Section 44 - Definitions
15 U.S.C. § 44 Cited 178 times 14 Legal Analyses
Defining "commerce" as including "commerce among the several States"
Section 1056 - Disclaimer of unregistrable matter
15 U.S.C. § 1056 Cited 69 times 3 Legal Analyses
Limiting effect of disclaimers to mark for which registration was sought
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"

Gruma, S.A.B. de C.V., and Azteca Milling, L.P. v. Instamasa Sociedad Anonima

31 Cited authorities

Holding a Navy aircraft accident investigative report was admissible

Holding that the term "Safari" is generic for the articles of clothing that comprise the "Safari suit" outfit

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"

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"

Endorsing the use of internet evidence as admissible and competent evidence for evaluating a trademark

Finding “real interest” is shown by “a direct and personal stake in the outcome” or a “legitimate personal interest.”

Holding that a "likelihood of confusion cannot be predicated on dissection of a mark"

Holding that, although the Board may "ascertain the meaning and weight of each of the components that makes up the mark," it "ultimately must consider the mark as a whole and do so in the context of the goods or services at issue"

Holding applicant's incontestable registration of a service mark for "cash management account" did not automatically entitle applicant to registration of that mark for broader financial services

Holding that the Board erred in giving little weight to evidence of registered third-party marks in actual use

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

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"

Providing that a party is entitled to the admission of any part of a recorded statement which ought, in fairness, be considered contemporaneously with the portion of a statement excerpted by an adverse party

Defining "commerce" as including "commerce among the several States"

Limiting effect of disclaimers to mark for which registration was sought

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"