§

Safer, Inc. v. OMS Investments, Inc.

No. 91176445 (T.T.A.B. Feb. 22, 2010)
Safer, Inc. v. OMS Investments, Inc.

34 Cited authorities

  1. Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon, Inc. v. Alpha of Va., Inc.

    43 F.3d 922 (4th Cir. 1995)   Cited 923 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "valid, protectable trademark" is necessary to establish a claim of trademark infringement or unfair competition under the Lanham Act

  2. The Sports Authority v. Prime Hospitality

    89 F.3d 955 (2d Cir. 1996)   Cited 361 times
    Holding "The Sports Authority" and "sports authority" similar

  3. Wynn Oil Co. v. Thomas

    839 F.2d 1183 (6th Cir. 1988)   Cited 229 times
    Holding that bulk car wax and complete car washing service of one party and car care products of other party offered consumers the fundamentally same thing: a clean car

  4. Dieter v. B & H Industries of Southwest Florida, Inc.

    880 F.2d 322 (11th Cir. 1989)   Cited 208 times
    Holding that an incontestable mark is "presumed to be at least descriptive with secondary meaning, and therefore a relatively strong mark."

  5. In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 193 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"

  6. Oreck Corp. v. U.S. Floor Systems, Inc.

    803 F.2d 166 (5th Cir. 1986)   Cited 116 times
    Holding that incontestable status does not preclude defendant from arguing that mark is weak and not infringed because no confusion was present

  7. Miss World

    856 F.2d 1445 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 109 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, despite some similarities in appearance, sound, and meaning, marks "Mrs. of the World" and "Miss World" were dissimilar

  8. Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.

    222 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 76 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding similarity between LASER for golf clubs and golf balls and LASERSWING for golf practice devices, and noting that "the term ‘swing’ is both common and descriptive" and therefore "may be given little weight in reaching a conclusion on likelihood of confusion"

  9. Recot, Inc. v. Becton

    214 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 57 times
    Holding that the Board legally erred in not according sufficient weight to evidence of a mark's fame in a likelihood of confusion analysis, vacating, and remanding for further consideration

  10. In re Nat. Data Corp.

    753 F.2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 73 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "likelihood of confusion cannot be predicated on dissection of a mark"

  11. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 96,382 times   95 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

  12. Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons

    Fed. R. Evid. 403   Cited 23,729 times   88 Legal Analyses
    Adopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks

  13. Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 33   Cited 11,443 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Rule 30(b)

  14. Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty

    35 U.S.C. § 102   Cited 6,031 times   1028 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"

  15. Rule 902 - Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating

    Fed. R. Evid. 902   Cited 2,253 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Allowing authentication of domestic records of regularly conducted activity "by a certification of the custodian or another qualified person"

  16. Section 1115 - Registration on principal register as evidence of exclusive right to use mark; defenses

    15 U.S.C. § 1115   Cited 1,970 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Providing that registration of a mark "shall be prima facie evidence of the validity of the registered mark" but "shall not preclude another person from proving any legal or equitable defense or defect"

  17. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,615 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"

  18. Section 2.122 - Matters in evidence

    37 C.F.R. § 2.122   Cited 24 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that in inter partes proceeding, "[t]he allegation in an application for registration, or in a registration, of a date of use is not evidence on behalf of the applicant or registrant" but, rather, "a date of use of a mark must be established by competent evidence"

  19. Section 2.120 - Discovery

    37 C.F.R. § 2.120   Cited 23 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Providing that the TTAB "in its discretion, may refuse to consider the additional written disclosures or responses"