All State & Fed.
JX
Search with
Parallel Search
Enter a full sentence between 5 and 30 words to find cases with conceptually similar sentences
or
Keyword Search
Enter keyword terms, accompanied by optional Boolean connectors
AND
fraud AND damages
Both terms in document
OR
car OR automobile
Either term in document
NOT
infringement NOT patent
Term must not appear in document
""
"due diligence"
Exact match
()
appeal AND (verdict OR judgment)
Grouping terms
*
withdr*w
Single letter wildcard (withdraw, withdrew)
!
infring!
Root expander (infringe, infringed, infringing)
/n
investor /5 diligence
Terms within n words of each other
/s
fees /s reasonable
Terms within same sentence
/p
admissible /p warrant
Terms within the same paragraph
Search the Law
Search
Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I.
uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
File picker
Drag a complaint or brief here
Upload a complaint or brief
Or,
choose a document to upload
Choose Document
Secure
§
Help
Sign In
Pacific Sea Foods Co. v. Emerald Seafoods, Inc.
OPP (T.T.A.B. Jun. 6, 1997)
Copy Cite
Read
Read
Attorney Analyses
Analyses
Citing Briefs
Briefs
Citing Cases
Citing Cases
Cited Authorities
Cited Authorities
3
Pacific Sea Foods Co. v. Emerald Seafoods, Inc.
3
Cited authorities
Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America
970 F.2d 874 (Fed. Cir. 1992)
Cited 39 times
Finding similarity between "CENTURY 21" and "CENTURY LIFE OF AMERICA" in part because "consumers must first notice th[e] identical lead word"
Federated Foods v. Fort Howard Paper Co.
544 F.2d 1098 (C.C.P.A. 1976)
Cited 17 times
1 Legal Analyses
Stating 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
Rule 408 - Compromise Offers and Negotiations
Fed. R. Evid. 408
Cited 4,500 times
50 Legal Analyses
Holding that premature deliberations constituted an internal jury influence subject to the post-verdict restrictions of Rule 606(b)