11 Cited authorities
Mushroom Makers, Inc. v. R. G. Barry Corp.
580 F.2d 44 (2d Cir. 1978) Cited 285 timesDescribing likelihood of confusion as the "crucial issue" in a trademark infringement action
Otokoyama Co. Ltd. v. Wine of Japan Import
175 F.3d 266 (2d Cir. 1999) Cited 112 times 1 Legal AnalysesConcluding that if the Japanese word "otokoyama" described a generic type of sake, it could not be trademarked in order to prevent other sake vendors from using the term to describe sake of that type
In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.
476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973) Cited 194 times 33 Legal AnalysesReciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"
In re Dixie Restaurants, Inc.
105 F.3d 1405 (Fed. Cir. 1997) Cited 34 timesHolding that DELTA is the dominant portion of the mark THE DELTA CAFÉ where the disclaimed word CAFÉ is descriptive of applicant's restaurant services
Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America
970 F.2d 874 (Fed. Cir. 1992) Cited 39 timesFinding similarity between "CENTURY 21" and "CENTURY LIFE OF AMERICA" in part because "consumers must first notice th[e] identical lead word"
In re Majestic Distilling Co., Inc.
315 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2003) Cited 13 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that malt liquor and tequila sold under the same mark would cause a likelihood of confusion
Federated Foods v. Fort Howard Paper Co.
544 F.2d 1098 (C.C.P.A. 1976) Cited 17 times 1 Legal AnalysesStating 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
In re Sarkli, Ltd.
721 F.2d 353 (Fed. Cir. 1983) Cited 4 timesAppeal No. 83-983. November 18, 1983. Arnold Sprung, New York City, argued, for appellant. John F. Pitrelli, Arlington, Va., argued, for appellee. With him on the brief were Joseph F. Nakamura, Sol. and John W. Newhirst, Associate Sol., Washington, D.C. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Serial No. 266643. Before FRIEDMAN, SMITH and NIES, Circuit Judges. NIES, Circuit Judge. The decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (board) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
Application of Pneumatiques, Caoutchouc Man
487 F.2d 918 (C.C.P.A. 1973) Cited 4 timesPatent Appeal No. 9067. November 15, 1973. Paul M. Craig, Jr., attorney of record, for appellant. S. Wm. Cochran, for the Commissioner of Patents, R. V. Lupo, of counsel. Appeal from the Patent Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, LANE and MILLER, Judges. RICH, Judge. This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (abstracted at 170 USPQ 543) affirming the examiner's refusal to register appellant's mark for
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. National Steel Construction Co.
442 F.2d 1383 (C.C.P.A. 1971) Cited 4 timesPatent Appeal No. 8527. June 10, 1971. Donald A. Gardiner, Jr. (Smith, Michael, Bradford Gardiner), Arlington, Va., W. Douglas Carothers, Jr. (Carothers Carothers), Pittsburgh, Pa., attorneys of record, for appellant. Orland M. Christensen, Gordon R. Sanborn (Christensen, Sanborn, Matthews), Seattle, Wash., attorneys of record, for appellee. Before RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN, LANE, Judges, and LANDIS, Judge, United States Customs Court, sitting by designation. RICH, Judge. This is an appeal from the decision
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,616 times 275 Legal AnalysesGranting 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"