10 Cited authorities
In re Bayer
488 F.3d 960 (Fed. Cir. 2007) Cited 40 times 2 Legal AnalysesEndorsing the use of internet evidence as admissible and competent evidence for evaluating a trademark
In re Chamber of Commerce of the United States
675 F.3d 1297 (Fed. Cir. 2012) Cited 8 times 2 Legal AnalysesNo. 2011–1330. 2012-04-3 In re The CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES of America. William M. Merone, Kenyon & Kenyon, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for appellant. With him on the brief was Edward T. Colbert. Christina J. Hieber, Associate Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for appellee. With her on the brief were Raymond T. Chen, Solicitor, and Sydney O. Johnson, Jr., Associate Solicitor. Of counsel was Thomas V. Shaw, Associate Solicitor
In re MBNA America Bank, N.A.
340 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2003) Cited 11 times 1 Legal AnalysesNoting that arbitrary marks are inherently distinctive
University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co.
703 F.2d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 1983) Cited 19 times 2 Legal AnalysesIn 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.
In re Gyulay
820 F.2d 1216 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 14 times 1 Legal AnalysesStating that the Board did not err in affirming the examiner's prima facie case that the mark was merely descriptive
In re Omaha Nat. Corp.
819 F.2d 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Cited 4 times 1 Legal AnalysesAppeal No. 86-1567. May 20, 1987. Dennis L. Thomte, Zarley, McKee, Thomte, Voorhees Sease, Omaha, Neb., argued for appellant. Nancy C. Slutter, Asst. Sol., Arlington, Va., argued for appellee. With her on the brief were Joseph F. Nakamura, Sol. and Fred E. McKelvey, Deputy Sol., Washington, D.C. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before NIES, Circuit Judge, COWEN, Senior Circuit Judge, and ARCHER, Circuit Judge. NIES, Circuit Judge. Omaha National Bank appeals
J. Kohnstam, Ltd. v. Louis Marx and Company
280 F.2d 437 (C.C.P.A. 1960) Cited 26 times 1 Legal AnalysesPatent Appeal No. 6503. June 29, 1960. Abraham A. Saffitz, Washington, D.C. (Emanuel R. Posnack, New York City, of counsel), for appellant. James Franklin, New York City (Maxwell James, New York City, of counsel), for appellees. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, MARTIN, and SMITH, Associate Judges, and Judge C. WILLIAM KRAFT, Jr. United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, designated to participate in place of Judge O'Connell, pursuant to provisions of Section 292(d)
In re Richardson Ink Co.
511 F.2d 559 (C.C.P.A. 1975) Cited 5 times 1 Legal AnalysesPatent Appeal Nos. 74-609, 74-610. March 6, 1975. Alan M. Abrams, Robert E. Sloat, Des Plaines, Ill., attorneys of record, for appellant. Joseph F. Nakamura, Washington, D.C., for the Commissioner of Patents. Jack E. Armore, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, RICH, LANE and MILLER, Judges, and ALMOND, Senior Judge. LANE, Judge. DECISION These appeals are from the decisions of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, 181 USPQ 845
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,595 times 273 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"
Section 1056 - Disclaimer of unregistrable matter
15 U.S.C. § 1056 Cited 69 times 3 Legal AnalysesLimiting effect of disclaimers to mark for which registration was sought