Lancer Orthodontics, Inc.
3 Cited authorities
Electronic Design Sales v. Electronic Sys
954 F.2d 713 (Fed. Cir. 1992) Cited 28 timesHolding that purchaser confusion is the "primary focus" and, in case of goods and services that are sold, "the inquiry generally will turn on whether actual or potential `purchasers' are confused"
Pfizer Inc. v. Astra Pharmaceutical Prods.
858 F. Supp. 1305 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) Cited 17 timesHolding that "the existence of the family of marks should be judged at the time that the junior user entered the marketplace"
Federated Foods v. Fort Howard Paper Co.
544 F.2d 1098 (C.C.P.A. 1976) Cited 16 times 1 Legal AnalysesStating that the mere existence of modern supermarket containing wide variety or products should not foreclose further inquiry into the likelihood of confusion arising from the use of similar marks on any goods so displayed