§

K. Hov IP II, Inc. v. Jonathan Benner-Ortega dba Metro Living

No. 91185619 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 26, 2012)
K. Hov IP II, Inc. v. Jonathan Benner-Ortega dba Metro Living

9 Cited authorities

  1. Abercrombie Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, Inc.

    537 F.2d 4 (2d Cir. 1976)   Cited 818 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the term "Safari" is generic for the articles of clothing that comprise the "Safari suit" outfit

  2. 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.”

  3. 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"

  4. In re Save Venice New York, Inc.

    259 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Observing that " registered mark is incontestable only in the form registered and for the goods or services claimed"

  5. In re Wada

    194 F.3d 1297 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 11 times
    Affirming PTO ruling that "New York Ways Gallery" was primarily geographically descriptive because "NEW YORK is not an obscure geographical term and that it is known as a place where the goods at issue here are designed, manufactured, and sold. . . ."

  6. In re Gould Paper Corp.

    834 F.2d 1017 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 20 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the compound term "SCREEN-WIPE" is generic as applied to wipes for cleaning monitor screens

  7. Application of Reynolds Metals Company

    480 F.2d 902 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 3 times

    Patent Appeal No. 9066. June 28, 1973. Browne, Beveridge, DeGrandi Kline, Washington, D.C., attorneys of record, for appellant. Francis C. Browne, Richard G. Kline, John M. Rommel, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Joseph F. Nakamura, Acting Sol., Washington D.C., for the Commissioner of Patents. Raymond E. Martin, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, RICH, BALDWIN and LANE, Judges, and ALMOND, Senior Judge. MARKEY, Chief Judge. This

  8. In re Canada Dry Ginger Ale, Inc.

    86 F.2d 830 (C.C.P.A. 1936)   Cited 17 times

    No. 3698. December 21, 1936. Appeal from Commissioner of Patents, Serial No. 334,522. Application by the Canada Dry Ginger Ale, Inc., for the registration of a trade-mark. From a decision of the Commissioner of Patents who affirmed the decision of Examiner of Trade-Marks refusing registration, applicant appeals. Affirmed. Edward S. Rogers, of Chicago, Ill., and Thomas L. Mead, Jr., of Washington, D.C., for appellant. R.F. Whitehead, of Washington, D.C. (Howard S. Miller, of Washington, D.C., of counsel)

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,608 times   274 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"