§

U.S. Olympic Committee v. Lifetime Products, Inc.

OPP (T.T.A.B. Jun. 2, 1998)
U.S. Olympic Committee v. Lifetime Products, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 243,214 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence is "so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law"

  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 222,322 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  3. Bishop v. Wood

    426 U.S. 341 (1976)   Cited 2,718 times
    Holding that if an employee "held [her] position at the will and pleasure" of the government, this "necessarily establishes that [the employee] had [n]o property interest"

  4. Opryland USA v. Great American Music Show

    970 F.2d 847 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 24 times
    In Opryland, Opryland USA opposed the registration of "THE CAROLINA OPRY," arguing that the term was confusingly similar to Opryland's own marks.

  5. Lloyd's Food Products, Inc. v. Eli's, Inc.

    987 F.2d 766 (Fed. Cir. 1993)   Cited 18 times
    Holding that third-party evidence should not be disregarded in evaluating the strength of a mark for purposes of determining the likelihood of confusion

  6. Larry Harmon Pictures v. Williams Restaurant

    929 F.2d 662 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 16 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding single restaurant satisfied "use in commerce" requirement because "the record here established that [restaurant's mark] has been used in connection with services rendered to customers traveling across state boundaries," and distinguishing similar earlier cases where there was no such evidence

  7. Olde Tyme Foods, Inc. v. Roundy's, Inc.

    961 F.2d 200 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 12 times
    Stating that "[a]s to strength of a mark . . . [third-party] registration evidence may not be given any weight . . . [because they are] not evidence of what happens in the market place"

  8. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 339,042 times   162 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit