§

Sky Climber, LLC v. Kabushiki Kaisha Aichi Corporation

No. 91193904 (T.T.A.B. Jan. 10, 2014)
Sky Climber, LLC v. Kabushiki Kaisha Aichi Corporation

15 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 284,972 times   370 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

  2. 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"

  3. West Florida Seafood, Inc. v. Jet Restaurants

    31 F.3d 1122 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 21 times
    Recognizing that separate corporate, business and personal entities that operate as a single entity in the eyes of the consuming public may be treated as such for trademark purposes

  4. P. A. B. Produits, Etc. v. Satinine Societa

    570 F.2d 328 (C.C.P.A. 1978)   Cited 13 times

    Appeal No. 77-589. February 16, 1978. Robert J. Patch, Washington, D.C. (Young Thompson, Arlington, Va.), attorneys of record, for appellant. G. Franklin Rothwell, Washington, D.C. (Sughrue, Rothwell, Mion, Zinn Macpeak, Washington, D.C.), attorneys of record, for appellee. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, LANE and MILLER, Associate Judges. LANE, Judge. Registrant appeals from a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (board)

  5. Dept. of Justice, F. B. I. v. Calspan Corp.

    578 F.2d 295 (C.C.P.A. 1978)   Cited 11 times

    Appeal No. 78-501. June 8, 1978. Joseph A. Hill, Louise O'Neil, Washington, D.C., attorneys of record, for appellant. Allen J. Jaffe, Williamsville, N.Y., attorney of record, for appellee. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, LANE and MILLER, Judges. MILLER, Judge. This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("board") denying appellant's petition to cancel

  6. King Candy Co. v. Eunice King's Kitchen

    496 F.2d 1400 (C.C.P.A. 1974)   Cited 8 times

    Patent Appeal No. 9245. June 6, 1974. J. Timothy Hobbs, Washington, D.C. (Mason, Fenwick Lawrence, Washington, D.C.), attorney of record, for appellant. William B. Mason, Arlington, Va. (Mason, Mason Albright, Arlington, Va.), attorney of record, for appellee. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, LANE and MILLER, Judges. MARKEY, Chief Judge. This is an appeal from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, 178 USPQ 121 (1973)

  7. Rule 401 - Test for Relevant Evidence

    Fed. R. Evid. 401   Cited 14,166 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Stating that evidence is relevant if it has "any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence" and "the fact is of consequence in determining the action"

  8. Rule 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 803   Cited 13,148 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing exception to rule against hearsay for records of regularly conducted activities

  9. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,921 times   127 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

  10. Rule 602 - Need for Personal Knowledge

    Fed. R. Evid. 602   Cited 3,688 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Stating that " witness may testify only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter"

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 3,048 times   99 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

  12. 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"

  13. Section 1057 - Certificates of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1057   Cited 1,056 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a certificate of registration is prima facie evidence of an owner's right to use the mark

  14. Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1064   Cited 934 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services

  15. Section 2.104 - Contents of opposition

    37 C.F.R. § 2.104   Cited 2 times

    (a) The opposition must set forth a short and plain statement showing why the opposer believes he, she or it would be damaged by the registration of the opposed mark and state the grounds for opposition. ESTTA requires the opposer to select relevant grounds for opposition. The required accompanying statement supports and explains the grounds. (b) Oppositions to different applications owned by the same party may be joined in a consolidated opposition when appropriate, but the required fee must be