§

Screaming Eagle, LLC v. John I. Wascher

92067358 (T.T.A.B. Apr. 30, 2019)
Screaming Eagle, LLC v. John I. Wascher

17 Cited authorities

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 216,122 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  2. Adickes v. Kress Co.

    398 U.S. 144 (1970)   Cited 25,027 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a private person who conspires with government actors to deprive a plaintiff of her constitutional rights acts "under color of law" for purposes of § 1983

  3. Kerry Steel, Inc. v. Paragon Industries, Inc.

    106 F.3d 147 (6th Cir. 1997)   Cited 599 times
    Holding that plaintiff failed to make prima facie showing where it “alleged no facts connecting either the subject matter of the contract or its performance to the State of Michigan”

  4. In re Bose Corp.

    580 F.3d 1240 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 161 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an applicant commits fraud when it knowingly makes false, material representations of fact with an intent to deceive the PTO

  5. F.D.I.C. v. Prusia

    18 F.3d 637 (8th Cir. 1994)   Cited 115 times
    Holding that court abused its discretion in refusing to permit party to amend admission because permitting the amendment would have subserved the presentation of the merits and no prejudice was shown

  6. Shum v. Intel Corp.

    633 F.3d 1067 (Fed. Cir. 2011)   Cited 32 times
    Holding unjust enrichment claim not precluded by parties' written agreement where agreement covered conduct different from that underlying unjust enrichment claim

  7. Del Tabaco v. Gen. Cigar Co.

    753 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2014)   Cited 12 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appellant demonstrated entitlement to a "statutory cause of action" under the Lanham Act

  8. Christian Faith Fellowship Church v. adidas AG

    841 F.3d 986 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 3 times   7 Legal Analyses
    In Christian Faith Fellowship, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board concluded that two sales totaling $38 to two out-of-state residents were de minimis and therefore not sales in commerce.

  9. Lloyd's Food Products, Inc. v. Eli's, Inc.

    987 F.2d 766 (Fed. Cir. 1993)   Cited 18 times
    Holding that third-party evidence should not be disregarded in evaluating the strength of a mark for purposes of determining the likelihood of confusion

  10. King Automotive v. Speedy Muffler King

    667 F.2d 1008 (C.C.P.A. 1981)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Appeal No. 81-566. December 17, 1981. Frank H. Foster, Columbus, Ohio, for appellant. John V. Sobesky and Ernest A. Beutler, Jr., Birmingham, Mich., for appellee. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, MILLER and NIES, Judges. BALDWIN, Judge. This is an appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (board) of a decision granting appellee's motion to dismiss appellant's amended

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,411 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,877 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  13. Rule 36 - Requests for Admission

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 36   Cited 6,080 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Noting that facts admitted pursuant to a Rule 36 discovery request are "conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended"

  14. Rule 103 - Rulings on Evidence

    Fed. R. Evid. 103   Cited 3,433 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that once a court makes a definitive ruling on the record to either admit or exclude evidence, at or before trial, a party need not renew an objection at trial to preserve any alleged error for appeal

  15. Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 2,942 times   95 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

  16. Section 2.126 - Form of submissions to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

    37 C.F.R. § 2.126   Cited 1 times

    (a) Submissions must be made to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board via ESTTA. (1) Text in an electronic submission must be filed in at least 11-point type and double-spaced. (2) Exhibits pertaining to an electronic submission must be made electronically as an attachment to the submission and must be clear and legible. (b) In the event that ESTTA is unavailable due to technical problems, or when extraordinary circumstances are present, submissions may be filed in paper form. All submissions in paper