The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. v. Keith Alexander Ashe dba Spendology and Spendology LLC joined as party defendant

20 Cited authorities

  1. Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp.

    174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 1,125 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that use of competitor's trademark in metatags, which are not visible on a website, is actionable under the Lanham Act
  2. Rescuecom Corp. v. Google Inc.

    562 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2009)   Cited 237 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that complaint regarding Google's AdWord's recommendation of plaintiff's trademark to plaintiff's competitors "adequately plead[ed] a use in commerce" under the Lanham Act
  3. Mingus Constructors, Inc. v. U.S.

    812 F.2d 1387 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 375 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that letters indicating an intent to file a claim in the future for an unspecified amount were not claims as defined by the contract where the contractual definition of claim was substantially the same as the FAR definition: "a written demand or assertion by one of the parties seeking, as a legal right, the payment of money, adjustment or interpretation of contract terms, or other relief, arising under or relating to this contract"
  4. Foreword Magazine, Inc. v. Overdrive, Inc.

    Case No. 1:10-cv-1144 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 31, 2011)   Cited 90 times
    Finding “screen shots of Internet websites” authenticated on the basis of affidavits “along with other indicia of reliability (such as the Internet domain address and the date of printout)”
  5. In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 191 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"
  6. 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"
  7. Herbko Intern., Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc.

    308 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 2002)   Cited 47 times
    Explaining that proprietary rights are necessary to show priority of use when petitioning for cancellation under section 2(d)
  8. Akers v. Beal Bank

    845 F. Supp. 2d 238 (D.D.C. 2012)   Cited 29 times
    Explaining that “the nonmoving party ... may not rely solely on allegations or conclusory statements. Rather, the nonmoving party must present specific facts that would enable a reasonable jury to find in its favor”
  9. 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.”
  10. Hearts on Fire Co. v. Blue Nile, Inc.

    603 F. Supp. 2d 274 (D. Mass. 2009)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding the purchase of trademarks to trigger pop-up or banner advertisements is use in commerce
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 339,855 times   162 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  12. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,612 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"