TPI Holdings, Inc. v. TrailerTrader.com, LLC and Trailer Central LLC

25 Cited authorities

  1. Armstrong Co. v. Nu-Enamel Corp.

    305 U.S. 315 (1938)   Cited 344 times
    Holding that registration of a mark "does not create any substantive rights in the registrant"
  2. Coach House Rest. v. Coach and Six Rest

    934 F.2d 1551 (11th Cir. 1991)   Cited 145 times
    Holding that a likelihood of confusion furnishes one ground for cancelling a registration
  3. In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 190 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"
  4. Resorts of Pinehurst v. Pinehurst National

    148 F.3d 417 (4th Cir. 1998)   Cited 75 times
    Holding that likelihood of confusion is the basic test for both common law and federal trademark infringement
  5. Bridgestone/Firestone Research, Inc. v. Automobile Club de l'Ouest de la France

    245 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 51 times
    Holding that a petition for cancellation of a registered trademark was barred by the doctrine of laches based on the petitioner's constructive knowledge
  6. Juice Generation, Inc. v. GS Enterprises LLC

    794 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 28 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Determining that TTAB failed to adequately account for evidence of "a fair number of third-party uses" of similar marks by discounting the evidence for lack of "specifics regarding the extent of sales or promotional efforts surrounding the third-party marks"
  7. Metro Traffic Control v. Shadow Network

    104 F.3d 336 (Fed. Cir. 1997)   Cited 55 times
    Holding that third party may petition to cancel fraudulently obtained trademark registration
  8. Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Group

    637 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2011)   Cited 27 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Considering "corporate studies tracking awareness of the CITIBANK mark"
  9. Jack Wolfskin Ausrustung Fur Draussen GmbH & Co. KGAA v. New Millennium Sports, S.L.U.

    797 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 17 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Board erred in giving little weight to evidence of registered third-party marks in actual use
  10. Han Beauty, Inc. v. Alberto-Culver Co.

    236 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 33 times
    Finding no error because, "while the Board did not make explicit findings about the strength of the [opposer’s mark], the Board’s opinion reveals that the Board considered this factor"
  11. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,599 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"
  12. Section 1072 - Registration as constructive notice of claim of ownership

    15 U.S.C. § 1072   Cited 199 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Registering a trademark provides "constructive notice of the registrant's claim of ownership thereof"
  13. Section 1111 - Notice of registration; display with mark; recovery of profits and damages in infringement suit

    15 U.S.C. § 1111   Cited 170 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Providing that profits and damages are not available as civil remedies for trademark infringement unless the trademark registrant gives notice or the defendant has actual knowledge of the federal registration
  14. Section 1091 - Supplemental register

    15 U.S.C. § 1091   Cited 78 times
    Stating that marks registered on the Supplemental Register "must be capable of distinguishing the applicant's goods or services"
  15. Section 1069 - Application of equitable principles in inter partes proceedings

    15 U.S.C. § 1069   Cited 47 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing in the Lanham Act context that "[i]n all inter partes proceedings equitable principles of laches, estoppel, and acquiescence, where applicable may be considered and applied"
  16. Section 1094 - Provisions of chapter applicable to registrations on supplemental register

    15 U.S.C. § 1094   Cited 31 times
    Declaring evidentiary presumptions of § 1057(b), among other statutes, inapplicable to marks on supplemental register
  17. Section 1092 - Publication; not subject to opposition; cancellation

    15 U.S.C. § 1092   Cited 21 times
    Providing for cancellation of marks on USPTO's Principal and Supplemental Registers
  18. Section 1095 - Registration on principal register not precluded

    15 U.S.C. § 1095   Cited 8 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Registration of a mark on the supplemental register, or under the Act of March 19, 1920, shall not preclude registration by the registrant on the principal register established by this chapter. Registration of a mark on the supplemental register shall not constitute an admission that the mark has not acquired distinctiveness. 15 U.S.C. § 1095 July 5, 1946, ch. 540, title II, §27, 60 Stat. 436; Pub. L. 100-667, title I, §124, Nov. 16, 1988, 102 Stat. 3943. EDITORIAL NOTES REFERENCES IN TEXTAct of

  19. Section 2.106 - Answer

    37 C.F.R. § 2.106   Cited 12 times
    Defining compulsory counterclaim as "defense attacking the validity of any one or more of the registrations pleaded in the opposition"