§

Thomas J. Hulting d/b/a No More RINOs! Enterprises

No. 77666826 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 10, 2013)
Thomas J. Hulting d/b/a No More RINOs! Enterprises

12 Cited authorities

  1. Cosmetically Sealed Industries, Inc. v. Chesebrough-Pond's USA Co.

    125 F.3d 28 (2d Cir. 1997)   Cited 52 times
    Holding that phrase "Sealed With a Kiss" was a non-trademark, descriptive use because it conveyed an instruction

  2. Bellsouth Corp. v. Datanational Corp.

    60 F.3d 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1995)   Cited 26 times
    Finding summary judgment appropriate where all evidence was "uncontested"

  3. In re Boston Beer Co. Ltd. Partnership

    198 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 14 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the claim "The Best Beer in America" amounted to mere puffery

  4. In re Sar-Manco, Inc.

    70 B.R. 132 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1986)   Cited 19 times
    Finding bad faith where "the sole purpose of the Chapter 11 filing was to frustrate and delay the foreclosure action for as long as possible"

  5. In re McKenna

    4 B.R. 160 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1980)   Cited 21 times

    Bankruptcy No. 78 B 6246. April 28, 1980. Joseph McDonald, Gary, Ind., for plaintiff. Howard R. Weiss, Chicago, Ill., for defendant. ORDER LAWRENCE FISHER, Bankruptcy Judge. This matter coming on to be heard upon the Complaint of PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION, Creditor of the above-named Bankruptcy, pursuant to Section 17c(2) of the Bankruptcy Act, to determine the dischargeability of debt claimed to be nondischargeable pursuant to Clause Eight of Section 17a of the Bankruptcy Act, and upon Bankrupt's

  6. Otto Roth Co. v. Universal Foods Corp.

    640 F.2d 1317 (C.C.P.A. 1981)   Cited 20 times
    Recognizing importance of "free use of the language" in commercial speech context

  7. Roux Laboratories, Inc. v. Clairol Inc.

    427 F.2d 823 (C.C.P.A. 1970)   Cited 24 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the phrase "Hair Color So Natural Only Her Hairdresser Knows for Sure" is protectable as a trademark

  8. Plastilite Corporation v. Kassnar Imports

    508 F.2d 824 (C.C.P.A. 1975)   Cited 9 times
    Holding that in determining distinctiveness, "it is the association of the mark with a particular source by the ultimate consumers which is to be measured-not [applicant's] intent" in adopting the mark

  9. In re Bose Corp.

    546 F.2d 893 (C.C.P.A. 1976)   Cited 1 times

    Patent Appeal No. 76-581. December 16, 1976. Charles Hieken, Hieken Cohen, Waltham, Mass., atty. of record, for appellant. Joseph F. Nakamura, Washington, D.C., for the Commissioner of Patents; Fred W. Sherling, Washington, D.C., of counsel. Appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. LANE, Judge. This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (board) affirming the refusal to register SYNCOM for loudspeaker

  10. Denney v. Elizabeth Arden Sales Corporation

    263 F.2d 347 (C.C.P.A. 1959)   Cited 7 times

    Patent Appeal No. 6410. February 5, 1959. Mock Blum, New York City (Asher Blum, New York City, and Charles R. Allen, Jr., Washington, D.C., of counsel), for appellant. Howard A. Rosenberg, New York City (William R. Liberman, New York City, of counsel), for appellee. Before WORLEY, Acting Chief Judge, and RICH and MARTIN, Judges. MARTIN, Judge. This appeal is from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents, speaking through the Assistant Commissioner, affirming the decision of the Examiner of Interferences

  11. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,914 times   126 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

  12. Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 3,039 times   99 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark