5 Cited authorities
In re Dixie Restaurants, Inc.
105 F.3d 1405 (Fed. Cir. 1997) Cited 33 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
Application of Wella Corp.
565 F.2d 143 (C.C.P.A. 1977) Cited 5 timesStating that "descriptiveness alone does not necessarily preclude registration on the Supplemental Register. 15 U.S.C. § 1091."
Powermatics, Inc. v. Globe Roofing Products
341 F.2d 127 (C.C.P.A. 1965) Cited 16 timesPatent Appeal No. 7281. February 11, 1965. Burgess, Dinklage Sprung, New York City (Arnold Sprung, New York City, of counsel) for appellant. Robert C. Williams, D.D. Allegretti, Chicago, Ill., for appellee. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, MARTIN, SMITH, and ALMOND, Judges. WORLEY, Chief Judge. Powermatics appeals from the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board awarding priority to Globe, senior party, in a trademark interference between Globe's Registration No. 704,179 for "PANELUME"
Elder Mfg. Co. v. International Shoe Co.
194 F.2d 114 (C.C.P.A. 1952) Cited 13 timesPatent Appeal No. 5834. January 29, 1952. Alfred W. Petchaft, St. Louis, Mo. (Lloyd W. Patch, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for appellant. Lawrence C. Kingsland, Edmund C. Rogers, and Estill E. Ezell, all of St. Louis, Mo. (Kingsland, Rogers Ezell, St. Louis, Mo., of counsel), for appellee. Before JACKSON, Acting Chief Judge, and O'CONNELL, JOHNSON and WORLEY, Judges. JOHNSON, Judge. This is an appeal in a trade-mark opposition proceeding from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents, speaking
Section 1092 - Publication; not subject to opposition; cancellation
15 U.S.C. § 1092 Cited 21 timesProviding for cancellation of marks on USPTO's Principal and Supplemental Registers