§

We Vote v. LeYeF, LLC

92066153 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 26, 2020)
We Vote v. LeYeF, LLC

35 Cited authorities

  1. Gonzales v. Raich

    545 U.S. 1 (2005)   Cited 1,183 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because “Congress had a rational basis” for concluding that a statute implements Commerce Clause power, the statute falls within the scope of congressional “authority to ‘make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper’ to ‘regulate Commerce ... among the several States' ”

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

    174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 1,113 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

  3. Wickard v. Filburn

    317 U.S. 111 (1942)   Cited 927 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "even if appellee’s activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial effect on interstate commerce"

  4. United Drug Co. v. Rectanus Co.

    248 U.S. 90 (1918)   Cited 548 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it is a "fundamental error [to suppose] that a trade-mark right is a right in gross or at large" and that there is "no such thing as property in a trade-mark except as a right appurtenant to an established business or trade in connection with which the mark is employed"

  5. Sugar Busters LLC v. Brennan

    177 F.3d 258 (5th Cir. 1999)   Cited 159 times
    Holding that products appealing to diabetics are not substantially similar

  6. Hanover Milling Co. v. Metcalf

    240 U.S. 403 (1916)   Cited 545 times
    Holding that "[i]n the ordinary case of parties competing under the same mark in the same market, it is correct to say that prior appropriation settles the question."

  7. TMT North America, Inc. v. Magic Touch GmbH

    124 F.3d 876 (7th Cir. 1997)   Cited 116 times
    Recognizing the danger of allowing parties to "us[e] self-serving testimony to gain ownership of trademarks"

  8. On-Line Careline, Inc. v. America Online

    229 F.3d 1080 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 77 times
    Applying Recot in analyzing the similarity of services

  9. 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

  10. 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)

  11. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 95,193 times   92 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

  12. Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

    Fed. R. Evid. 801   Cited 19,697 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

  13. Rule 802 - The Rule Against Hearsay

    Fed. R. Evid. 802   Cited 4,039 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing federal statutes, the Federal Rules of Evidence, or Supreme Court rules as sources for exceptions to the rule against hearsay

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 3,033 times   99 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

  15. Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1064   Cited 923 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services