§

The Synergy Co. of Utah, LLC v. IVC Industries, Inc.

No. 92026899 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 27, 2002)
The Synergy Co. of Utah, LLC v. IVC Industries, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Mil-Mar Shoe Co., Inc. v. Shonac Corp.

    75 F.3d 1153 (7th Cir. 1996)   Cited 99 times
    Holding that "Warehouse Shoes" is generic for large shoe store, based on evidence that more than 8,000 retail stores use the word "warehouse" in their names, and that hundreds of retail shoe stores use some form of either "Shoe Warehouse" or "Warehouse Shoes" in their names

  2. In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, Smith

    828 F.2d 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 57 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding applicant's incontestable registration of a service mark for "cash management account" did not automatically entitle applicant to registration of that mark for broader financial services

  3. In re Northland Aluminum Products, Inc.

    777 F.2d 1556 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 49 times
    Holding "[e]vidence of the public's understanding of term," for purposes of establishing if mark is descriptive, "may be obtained from any competent source, including .^.^. dictionaries"

  4. H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. International Ass'n of Fire Chiefs, Inc.

    782 F.2d 987 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 44 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Reversing decision of TTAB that "Fire Chief," as applied to monthly magazine circulated to fire departments, was generic

  5. Magic Wand, Inc. v. RDB, Inc.

    940 F.2d 638 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 32 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that the Lanham Act is clear "that the relevant public for a genericness determination is the purchasing or consuming public"

  6. Henri's Food Products Co. v. Tasty Snacks

    817 F.2d 1303 (7th Cir. 1987)   Cited 28 times
    Finding that term "Tast-Tee" describes salad dressing

  7. Dan Robbins Associates v. Questor Corp.

    599 F.2d 1009 (C.C.P.A. 1979)   Cited 27 times
    Involving cancellation for likelihood of confusion

  8. In re Seats, Inc.

    757 F.2d 274 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 10 times
    Holding that the word "SEATS" was not generic for ticket reservations services even though it could not be registered in connection with chairs or couches

  9. In re Montrachet S.A

    878 F.2d 375 (Fed. Cir. 1989)   Cited 5 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 89-1114. June 30, 1989. John J. McGlew, McGlew Tuttle, P.C., New York City, argued for appellant. Nancy Slutter, Associate Sol., Office of the Sol., Arlington, Va., argued for appellee. With her on the brief was Fred E. McKelvey, Sol. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, SKELTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. Appellant Montrachet S.A., a French company, appeals the decision of

  10. Roselux Chemical Co. v. Parsons Ammonia Co.

    299 F.2d 855 (C.C.P.A. 1962)   Cited 31 times
    Holding that $3,000,000 in sales in one year was insufficient to establish secondary meaning