Pamela Geller and Robert B. Spencer

10 Cited authorities

In re Bayer
488 F.3d 960 (Fed. Cir. 2007) Cited 39 times 2 Legal Analyses
Endorsing the use of internet evidence as admissible and competent evidence for evaluating a trademark
Pro-Football, Inc. v. Harjo
415 F.3d 44 (D.C. Cir. 2005) Cited 29 times 5 Legal Analyses
Permitting laches as a defense to cancellation claim brought more than five years after registration
Pro Football v. Harjo
565 F.3d 880 (D.C. Cir. 2009) Cited 17 times 7 Legal Analyses
Agreeing that sufficient "evidence of prejudice ... may arise from mere proof of continued investment in the late-attacked mark"
Pro-Football, Inc. v. Harjo
284 F. Supp. 2d 96 (D.D.C. 2003) Cited 19 times 6 Legal Analyses
Finding economic prejudice if a trademark registration were cancelled where a defendant had invested money in marketing and brand development
Pro-Football, Inc. v. Harjo
567 F. Supp. 2d 46 (D.D.C. 2008) Cited 8 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that laches barred cancellation action against trademark where "[e]conomic prejudice ar[ose] from investment in and development of the trademark"
In re Boulevard Entertainment, Inc.
334 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2003) Cited 9 times 2 Legal Analyses
Affirming refusal to register JACK–OFF marks
In re Mavety Media Group Ltd.
33 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 1994) Cited 13 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that PTO failed to prove that term was scandalous and thus unregistrable; PTO relied on dictionary definition of disputed term, but dictionary provided alternative definitions; proof failed because of "the absence of evidence as to which of these definitions the substantial composite [of consumers] would choose"
University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co.
703 F.2d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 1983) Cited 19 times 2 Legal Analyses
In University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 703 F.2d 1372, 1376, 217 USPQ 505, 509 (Fed. Cir. 1983), the court added that section 2(a) embraces concepts of the right to privacy which may be violated even in the absence of likelihood of confusion.
In re McGinley
660 F.2d 481 (C.C.P.A. 1981) Cited 14 times 21 Legal Analyses
Affirming refusal to register mark depicting genitalia
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,585 times 272 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"

Pamela Geller and Robert B. Spencer

10 Cited authorities

Endorsing the use of internet evidence as admissible and competent evidence for evaluating a trademark

Permitting laches as a defense to cancellation claim brought more than five years after registration

Agreeing that sufficient "evidence of prejudice ... may arise from mere proof of continued investment in the late-attacked mark"

Finding economic prejudice if a trademark registration were cancelled where a defendant had invested money in marketing and brand development

Holding that laches barred cancellation action against trademark where "[e]conomic prejudice ar[ose] from investment in and development of the trademark"

Affirming refusal to register JACK–OFF marks

In University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 703 F.2d 1372, 1376, 217 USPQ 505, 509 (Fed. Cir. 1983), the court added that section 2(a) embraces concepts of the right to privacy which may be violated even in the absence of likelihood of confusion.

Affirming refusal to register mark depicting genitalia

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"