§

Kerridge Commercial Systems Limited

87383302 (T.T.A.B. Aug. 9, 2019)
Kerridge Commercial Systems Limited

9 Cited authorities

  1. Earnhardt v. Kerry Earnhardt, Inc.

    864 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2017)   Cited 1 times

    2016-1939 07-27-2017 Teresa H. EARNHARDT, Appellant v. KERRY EARNHARDT, INC., Appellee Uly Samuel Gunn, Alston & Bird LLP, Atlanta, GA, argued for appellant. Also represented by Larry Currell Jones, Charlotte, NC. David Blaine Sanders, Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson, P.A., Charlotte, NC, argued for appellee. Also represented by Cary Baxter Davis, Matthew Felton Tilley. Chen, Circuit Judge. Uly Samuel Gunn , Alston & Bird LLP, Atlanta, GA, argued for appellant. Also represented by Larry Currell Jones

  2. In re Hutchinson Technology Inc.

    852 F.2d 552 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 19 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the issue presented by a composite mark consisting of personal names is "what the purchasing public would think when confronted with the mark as a whole"

  3. In re Etablissements Darty Et Fils

    759 F.2d 15 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 8 times
    In Darty et Fils, however, even though, the primary question was whether "Darty" was primarily merely a surname, the Board had correctly held that the Opposers’ "provides no support for their contention."

  4. Quaker St. Oil Ref. Corp. v. Quaker Oil

    453 F.2d 1296 (C.C.P.A. 1972)   Cited 8 times

    Patent Appeal No. 8616. January 20, 1972. Edward G. Fenwick, Jr., Mason, Fenwick Lawrence, Washington, D.C., attorneys of record, for appellant. Frank B. Powell, Cohn Powell, St. Louis, Mo., attorneys of record, for appellee. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN, and LANE, Judges, and RAO, Judge, United States Customs Court, sitting by designation. ALMOND, Judge. This is an appeal from a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, reported in full at

  5. Application of Harris-Intertype Corporation

    518 F.2d 629 (C.C.P.A. 1975)   Cited 5 times
    In Harris, the court analyzed the Lanham Act's mandate that no trademark will be given to a name that is " primarily merely a surname."

  6. Application of Standard Elektrik

    371 F.2d 870 (C.C.P.A. 1967)   Cited 6 times

    Patent Appeal No. 7709. February 9, 1967. C. Cornell Remsen, Jr., New York City (Donald J. Goodell, New York City, of counsel), for appellant. Joseph Schimmel, Washington, D.C. (George C. Roeming, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for the Commissioner of Patents. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, SMITH, and ALMOND, Judges, and Judge WILLIAM H. KIRKPATRICK. Senior District Judge, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. SMITH, Judge. Appellant appeals from the decision of the Trademark

  7. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 28,605 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  8. 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

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,585 times   272 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"