Neostrata Co., Inc. and Herald Pharmacal, Inc. v. Neoteric Cosmetics, Inc.

17 Cited authorities

In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, Smith
828 F.2d 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 57 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding applicant's incontestable registration of a service mark for "cash management account" did not automatically entitle applicant to registration of that mark for broader financial services
E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co. v. Yoshida Int'l.
393 F. Supp. 502 (E.D.N.Y. 1975) Cited 83 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that survey results indicating that 68% of consumers viewed Teflon as a brand name rebutted the claim that the mark was generic
Yamaha Intern. Corp. v. Hoshino Gakki Co.
840 F.2d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1988) Cited 46 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding secondary meaning for shape of guitar head always appearing in advertising and promotional literature
In re Northland Aluminum Products, Inc.
777 F.2d 1556 (Fed. Cir. 1985) Cited 49 times
Holding "[e]vidence of the public's understanding of term," for purposes of establishing if mark is descriptive, "may be obtained from any competent source, including .^.^. dictionaries"
King-Seeley Thermos Co. v. Aladdin Industries
321 F.2d 577 (2d Cir. 1963) Cited 95 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that to determine whether trademark is generic, a court must determine the "principal significance of the word . . . its indication of the nature or class of an article, rather than an indication of its origin."
H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. International Ass'n of Fire Chiefs, Inc.
782 F.2d 987 (Fed. Cir. 1986) Cited 45 times 8 Legal Analyses
Reversing decision of TTAB that "Fire Chief," as applied to monthly magazine circulated to fire departments, was generic
King-Seeley Thermos Co. v. Aladdin Industries
418 F.2d 31 (2d Cir. 1969) Cited 73 times
Reversing a district court's denial of a modification request, and remanding for reconsideration of modification to relieve the burden of an obligor
Magic Wand, Inc. v. RDB, Inc.
940 F.2d 638 (Fed. Cir. 1991) Cited 32 times 1 Legal Analyses
Explaining that the Lanham Act is clear "that the relevant public for a genericness determination is the purchasing or consuming public"
Application of Abcor Development Corp.
588 F.2d 811 (C.C.P.A. 1978) Cited 36 times 2 Legal Analyses
In Abcor, the question before the court was whether applicant's alleged mark (GASBADGE) was "merely descriptive" within the meaning of § 2(e)(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).
Martahus v. Video Duplication Services, Inc.
3 F.3d 417 (Fed. Cir. 1993) Cited 13 times
Affirming cancellation of service mark where party seeking cancellation provided sales invoices, draft contract, and testimony demonstrating prior use of mark in dealings with customers and the relevant public on specific dates
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 94,403 times 92 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,600 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"

Neostrata Co., Inc. and Herald Pharmacal, Inc. v. Neoteric Cosmetics, Inc.

17 Cited authorities

Holding applicant's incontestable registration of a service mark for "cash management account" did not automatically entitle applicant to registration of that mark for broader financial services

Finding that survey results indicating that 68% of consumers viewed Teflon as a brand name rebutted the claim that the mark was generic

Finding secondary meaning for shape of guitar head always appearing in advertising and promotional literature

Holding "[e]vidence of the public's understanding of term," for purposes of establishing if mark is descriptive, "may be obtained from any competent source, including .^.^. dictionaries"

Holding that to determine whether trademark is generic, a court must determine the "principal significance of the word . . . its indication of the nature or class of an article, rather than an indication of its origin."

Reversing decision of TTAB that "Fire Chief," as applied to monthly magazine circulated to fire departments, was generic

Reversing a district court's denial of a modification request, and remanding for reconsideration of modification to relieve the burden of an obligor

Explaining that the Lanham Act is clear "that the relevant public for a genericness determination is the purchasing or consuming public"

In Abcor, the question before the court was whether applicant's alleged mark (GASBADGE) was "merely descriptive" within the meaning of § 2(e)(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).

Affirming cancellation of service mark where party seeking cancellation provided sales invoices, draft contract, and testimony demonstrating prior use of mark in dealings with customers and the relevant public on specific dates

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

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"