§

The Amor ALL/STP Product Company v. Limited liability company “Autoplastic”

No. 92056035 (T.T.A.B. Nov. 14, 2013)
The Amor ALL/STP Product Company v. Limited liability company “Autoplastic”

18 Cited authorities

  1. American Automobile Ass'n v. AAA Legal Clinic of Jefferson Crooke, P.C.

    930 F.2d 1117 (5th Cir. 1991)   Cited 249 times
    Holding the district court erred in excluding defendant's responses to plaintiff's requests for admissions where plaintiff "included the admissions in its pretrial order as `undisputed issues of fact,' introduced the admissions into evidence at trial and relied on them in support of its case"

  2. U.S. v. Kasuboski

    834 F.2d 1345 (7th Cir. 1987)   Cited 242 times
    Holding that "[a]dmissions made under Rule 36, even default admissions, can serve as the factual predicate for summary judgment"

  3. Brook Village North Associates v. General Elec

    686 F.2d 66 (1st Cir. 1982)   Cited 211 times
    Holding that defendant's failure to respond to a request for admission that included letters detailing reparation costs conclusively established damages

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

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 188 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"

  5. Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.

    222 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 72 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"

  6. Ritchie v. Simpson

    170 F.3d 1092 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 48 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding “real interest” is shown by “a direct and personal stake in the outcome” or a “legitimate personal interest.”

  7. Bose Corp. v. QSC Audio Products, Inc.

    293 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2002)   Cited 34 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Bose Corp. v. QSC Audio Prods., Inc., 293 F.3d 1367, 1375 (Fed.Cir.2002), this court held that the marks WAVE and ACOUSTIC WAVE have trademark strength independent of the Bose “house mark,” although the marks appear in the same sales literature.

  8. Kenner Parker Toys v. Rose Art Industries

    963 F.2d 350 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 49 times
    Holding that in light of the appearance, sound and meaning of the marks PLAY-DOH and FUNDOUGH, consumers may receive the "same commercial impression" from the marks

  9. International Order of Job's Daughters v. Lindeburg & Co.

    727 F.2d 1087 (Fed. Cir. 1984)   Cited 58 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under the doctrine of issue preclusion, the Ninth Circuit's earlier determination that a name and emblem did not serve as a trademark required cancellation of the registration

  10. Lipton Industries, Inc. v. Ralston Purina

    670 F.2d 1024 (C.C.P.A. 1982)   Cited 57 times
    Holding that admission contained in an answer was binding, despite the fact that it was made "on information and belief"

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 330,364 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 36 - Requests for Admission

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 36   Cited 6,145 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"