572 U.S. 118 (2014) Cited 3,067 times 74 Legal Analyses
Holding that the respondent could not "obtain relief" under § 1125 "without evidence of injury proximately caused by [the petitioner's] alleged misrepresentations"
Finding that promotional use of a mark on “incidental products” like whiskey, pens, watches, sunglasses, and food did not constitute use of mark for cigarettes
Finding the deposition testimony at issue admissible under Rule 804(b) as former testimony because the testimony had guarantees of trustworthiness as it was given under oath and defendants had the opportunity to test the accuracy of the deponent's statements