§

Wieland Dental + Technik GmbH & Co.

No. 76514103 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 7, 2007)
Wieland Dental + Technik GmbH & Co.

16 Cited authorities

  1. In re E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Co.

    476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973)   Cited 193 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Reciting thirteen factors to be considered, referred to as "DuPont factors"

  2. Palm Bay Imp. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin

    396 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 73 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Finding similarity between "VEUVE ROYALE" and "VEUVE CLICQUOT" because "VEUVE ... remains a ‘prominent feature’ as the first word in the mark and the first word to appear on the label"

  3. Massachusetts v. Westcott

    431 U.S. 322 (1977)   Cited 51 times
    Granting relief on a statutory basis foreclosed the Court from reaching a constitutional issue

  4. Knox v. Butler

    884 F.2d 849 (5th Cir. 1989)   Cited 77 times
    Holding that judicial notice of census data may properly be taken on habeas review

  5. In re Dixie Restaurants, Inc.

    105 F.3d 1405 (Fed. Cir. 1997)   Cited 34 times
    Holding that DELTA is the dominant portion of the mark THE DELTA CAFÉ where the disclaimed word CAFÉ is descriptive of applicant's restaurant services

  6. In re Majestic Distilling Co., Inc.

    315 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 13 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that malt liquor and tequila sold under the same mark would cause a likelihood of confusion

  7. United States v. Bailey

    97 F.3d 982 (7th Cir. 1996)   Cited 18 times
    In United States v. Bailey, 97 F.3d 982, 986 (7th Cir. 1996), we affirmed the trial court's denial of a § 3E1.1 departure.

  8. Goldblatt v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

    105 F.3d 1325 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 12 times
    In Goldblatt, the court found that although the parties agreed that the plaintiff's deposit would be used by the bank for a specific purpose, the plaintiff was unable to overcome the presumption that his deposits were general because he allowed his deposits to commingle with the bank's general funds.

  9. Canadian Imperial Bank v. Wells Fargo Bank

    811 F.2d 1490 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 13 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming likelihood of confusion

  10. Matter of Interco Inc.

    152 B.R. 273 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 1993)   Cited 4 times

    Bankruptcy Nos. 91-40442-172, 91-40446-172. Joint Admin. No. 91-40442-172. Objection No. 23. March 19, 1993. Bryan, Cave, McPheeters McRoberts, Gregory D. Willard, Lloyd A. Palans, Carl J. Spector, Vicki L. Little, St. Louis, MO, for debtors-in-possession. Steven K. Brown, St. Louis, MO, Samuel H. Liberman, Clayton, MO, for claimant. MEMORANDUM JAMES J. BARTA, Bankruptcy Judge. At Saint Louis, in this District, this 19th day of March, 1993. This Memorandum addresses the Debtors' objection to the

  11. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 30,329 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  12. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,615 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"