§

Hubcap Heaven, LLC v. Hubcap Heaven, Inc.

No. 94001147 (T.T.A.B. Jan. 25, 2005)
Hubcap Heaven, LLC v. Hubcap Heaven, Inc.

5 Cited authorities

  1. Allard Enterprises v. Advanced Programming

    249 F.3d 564 (6th Cir. 2001)   Cited 82 times
    Holding that under Ohio common law, the plaintiff acquired common law trademark rights because of its substantial use for over ten years in a given area

  2. In re Beatrice Foods Co.

    429 F.2d 466 (C.C.P.A. 1970)   Cited 49 times
    In Beatrice Foods, our predecessor court held that "[o]nce there has been a determination that both parties are entitled to a federal registration, the extent to which those registrations are to be restricted territorially must... be governed by the statutory standard of likelihood of confusion."

  3. Kellogg Co. v. Pack'em Enterprises, Inc.

    951 F.2d 330 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 14 times
    Concluding that “substantial and undisputed differences” between the parties' use of FROOTEE ICE and FROOT LOOPS warranted summary judgment because “the dissimilarity of the marks in their entireties itself made it unlikely that confusion would result from the simultaneous use of the marks”

  4. Gray v. Daffy Dan's Bargaintown

    823 F.2d 522 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 7 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Referencing in dictum the general principle that a registrant needed to show "lawful use in commerce"

  5. Rule 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 803   Cited 13,038 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing exception to rule against hearsay for records of regularly conducted activities