Radiant Technology, Inc.

14 Cited authorities

In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, Smith
828 F.2d 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 58 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
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"
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"
In re Gould Paper Corp.
834 F.2d 1017 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 20 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the compound term "SCREEN-WIPE" is generic as applied to wipes for cleaning monitor screens
In re Bush Bros. Co.
884 F.2d 569 (Fed. Cir. 1989) Cited 16 times 1 Legal Analyses
No. 89-1071. September 1, 1989. Edward G. Fenwick, Mason, Fenwick Lawrence, Washington, D.C., submitted for appellant. With him on the brief was Brian D. Anderson. Albin F. Drost, Associate Sol., Office of the Sol., of Arlington, Va., submitted for appellee. With him on the brief was Fred E. McKelvey, Sol. Appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial Appeal Board. Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, BENNETT, Senior Circuit Judge, and BISSELL, Circuit Judge. PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge
University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co.
703 F.2d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 1983) Cited 20 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.
Loglan Institute v. Logical Language Group
962 F.2d 1038 (Fed. Cir. 1992) Cited 10 times
Holding that it is "well settled" that a TTAB decision "must be accepted as controlling upon a finding of fact . . . unless the contrary is established by testimony which in character and amount carries thorough conviction"
Remington Products v. North Am. Philips Corp.
892 F.2d 1576 (Fed. Cir. 1990) Cited 10 times
Holding that the phrase "travel care" had "gone into the public domain as a category of goods designation in the marketplace by reason of its extensive use as such" by the time the trademark registration was sought, the point at which the descriptiveness of the mark is properly determined
Hancock v. Am. Steel Wire Co. of N.J
203 F.2d 737 (C.C.P.A. 1953) Cited 30 times
Holding infringer's use of "Tornado" on wire fencing carried identical meaning to protected user's "Cyclone"
Cummins Engine Co. v. Continental Motors
359 F.2d 892 (C.C.P.A. 1966) Cited 12 times
Rejecting challenge to standing even though petitioner "was not using the term as a trademark nor did it co[n]template doing so," and concluding that "[a]ppellee as a competitor of appellant clearly has reason to believe it will be damaged to the extent required by statute"
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,610 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"
Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration
15 U.S.C. § 1064 Cited 929 times 51 Legal Analyses
Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services
Section 1091 - Supplemental register
15 U.S.C. § 1091 Cited 80 times
Stating that marks registered on the Supplemental Register "must be capable of distinguishing the applicant's goods or services"

Radiant Technology, Inc.

14 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

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"

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

Holding that the compound term "SCREEN-WIPE" is generic as applied to wipes for cleaning monitor screens

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.

Holding that it is "well settled" that a TTAB decision "must be accepted as controlling upon a finding of fact . . . unless the contrary is established by testimony which in character and amount carries thorough conviction"

Holding that the phrase "travel care" had "gone into the public domain as a category of goods designation in the marketplace by reason of its extensive use as such" by the time the trademark registration was sought, the point at which the descriptiveness of the mark is properly determined

Holding infringer's use of "Tornado" on wire fencing carried identical meaning to protected user's "Cyclone"

Rejecting challenge to standing even though petitioner "was not using the term as a trademark nor did it co[n]template doing so," and concluding that "[a]ppellee as a competitor of appellant clearly has reason to believe it will be damaged to the extent required by statute"

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"

Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services

Stating that marks registered on the Supplemental Register "must be capable of distinguishing the applicant's goods or services"