Johnson & Johnson and Roc International S.A.R.L. v. Obschestvo s Ogranitchennoy Otvetstvennostiu WDS

6 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 265,271 times 281 Legal Analyses
Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 278,436 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
Lipton Industries, Inc. v. Ralston Purina
670 F.2d 1024 (C.C.P.A. 1982) Cited 58 times
Holding that admission contained in an answer was binding, despite the fact that it was made "on information and belief"
Selfway, Inc. v. Travelers Petroleum, Inc.
579 F.2d 75 (C.C.P.A. 1978) Cited 14 times
In Selfway, the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals interpreted the Lanham Act as permitting concurrent rights to be adjudicated only in a concurrent use proceeding, not in a cancellation proceeding.
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 359,794 times 954 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 1068 - Action of Director in interference, opposition, and proceedings for concurrent use registration or for cancellation
15 U.S.C. § 1068 Cited 25 times 3 Legal Analyses
Stating that, in such proceedings, the Patent and Trademark Office may "modify the application or registration by limiting the goods or services specified therein"

Johnson & Johnson and Roc International S.A.R.L. v. Obschestvo s Ogranitchennoy Otvetstvennostiu WDS

6 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

Lipton Industries, Inc. v. Ralston Purina

Holding that admission contained in an answer was binding, despite the fact that it was made "on information and belief"

Selfway, Inc. v. Travelers Petroleum, Inc.

In Selfway, the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals interpreted the Lanham Act as permitting concurrent rights to be adjudicated only in a concurrent use proceeding, not in a cancellation proceeding.

Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Section 1068 - Action of Director in interference, opposition, and proceedings for concurrent use registration or for cancellation

Stating that, in such proceedings, the Patent and Trademark Office may "modify the application or registration by limiting the goods or services specified therein"