§

Kraft Group LLC v. William A. Harpole

No. 91185033 (T.T.A.B. Apr. 22, 2009)
Kraft Group LLC v. William A. Harpole

8 Cited authorities

  1. VNA Plus, Inc. v. Apria Healthcare Group, Inc.

    29 F. Supp. 2d 1253 (D. Kan. 1998)   Cited 34 times
    Finding that a defendant involved in the day to day operations by controlling the billing services and practices of the enterprise was at the center of the enterprise

  2. Section 1126 - International conventions

    15 U.S.C. § 1126   Cited 185 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Stating that an application under § 44 "must state the applicant's bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, but use in commerce shall not be required prior to registration"

  3. Section 2.34 - Bases for filing a trademark or service mark application

    37 C.F.R. § 2.34   Cited 14 times   25 Legal Analyses

    (a) An application for a trademark or service mark must include one or more of the following five filing bases: (1)Use in commerce under section 1(a) of the Act. The requirements for an application under section 1(a) of the Act are: (i) The applicant's verified statement that the mark is in use in commerce. If the verified statement is not filed with the initial application, the verified statement must also allege that the mark was in use in commerce as of the application filing date; (ii) The date

  4. Section 2.32 - Requirements for a complete trademark or service mark application

    37 C.F.R. § 2.32   Cited 8 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Stating that registrants must submit an English translation of any non-English wording and "[i]f the mark includes non-Latin characters, a transliteration of those characters, and either a translation of the transliterated term in English, or a statement that the transliterated term has no meaning in English"

  5. Section 2.21 - Requirements for receiving a filing date

    37 C.F.R. § 2.21   Cited 6 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a drawing in order to obtain a filing date

  6. Section 2.129 - Oral argument; reconsideration

    37 C.F.R. § 2.129   Cited 2 times

    (a) If a party desires to have an oral argument at final hearing, the party shall request such argument by a separate notice filed not later than ten days after the due date for the filing of the last reply brief in the proceeding. Oral arguments will be heard by at least three Administrative Trademark Judges or other statutory members of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board at the time specified in the notice of hearing. If any party appears at the specified time, that party will be heard. Parties

  7. Section 2.35 - Adding, deleting, or substituting bases

    37 C.F.R. § 2.35   Cited 2 times   5 Legal Analyses

    (a) In an application under section 66(a) of the Act, an applicant may not add, substitute or delete a basis, unless the applicant meets the requirements for transformation under section 70(c) of the Act and § 7.31 of this chapter. (b) In an application under section 1 or section 44 of the Act: (1) Before publication for opposition, an applicant may add or substitute a basis, if the applicant meets all requirements for the new basis, as stated in § 2.34 , § 2.44 , or § 2.45 . The applicant may delete

  8. Section 2.75 - Amendment to change application to different register

    37 C.F.R. § 2.75   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) An application for registration on the Principal Register under section 1(a) or 44 of the Act may be changed to an application for registration on the Supplemental Register and vice versa by amending the application to comply with the rules relating to the appropriate register, as the case may be. (b) An application under section 1(b) of the Act may be amended to change the application to a different register only after submission of an acceptable amendment to allege use under § 2.76 or statement