28 Cited authorities

Goto.com, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co.
202 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 562 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that marks were "strikingly similar" when considered with colors as used in commerce despite PTO's determination that they were not confusingly similar based on black and white submission
Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Sandlin
846 F.2d 1175 (9th Cir. 1988) Cited 396 times
Holding that under both, the "ultimate test" is "whether the public is likely to be deceived or confused by the similarity of the marks"
Sara Lee Corporation v. Kayser-Roth Corp.
81 F.3d 455 (4th Cir. 1996) Cited 260 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the trademark owner need not sue "until the likelihood of confusion looms large"
Patsy's Brand, Inc. v. I.O.B. Realty, Inc.
317 F.3d 209 (2d Cir. 2003) Cited 185 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that litigation conduct can form the basis for an award of attorney's fees where such conduct is "fraudulent."
K. F. C. v. Diversified Packaging
549 F.2d 368 (5th Cir. 1977) Cited 221 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "determinative question" in applying common law tort of unfair competition is "whether the tortfeasor's practices are likely to mislead customers into believing that the product emanates from or has been endorsed by the claimant"
Conan Properties, Inc. v. Conans Pizza, Inc.
752 F.2d 145 (5th Cir. 1985) Cited 171 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding injunctive relief to be appropriate for use that mark-owner acquiesced to but not for infringement that took place after receipt of a cease and desist letter
Attrezzi, LLC v. Maytag Corp.
436 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2006) Cited 93 times
Holding assessment of consumer confusion a result of consultation of factors, not result of mechanical formula
Chevron Chem. v. Voluntary Purchasing Groups
659 F.2d 695 (5th Cir. 1981) Cited 175 times
Holding that the same principles that govern trademark law should apply to trade dress litigation
Empresa Cubana Del Tabaco v. Culbro Corp.
399 F.3d 462 (2d Cir. 2005) Cited 83 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that there is a "likelihood of confusion" where "survey evidence as well as anecdotal evidence of actual confusion" exists
Tamko Roofing Products v. Ideal Roofing
282 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2002) Cited 88 times 4 Legal Analyses
Affirming an injunction against defendant's use of a mark too similar to defendant's previously infringing mark
Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 Cited 48,370 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

Visible Systems Corporation v. Unisys Corporation

28 Cited authorities

Holding that marks were "strikingly similar" when considered with colors as used in commerce despite PTO's determination that they were not confusingly similar based on black and white submission

Holding that under both, the "ultimate test" is "whether the public is likely to be deceived or confused by the similarity of the marks"

Holding that the trademark owner need not sue "until the likelihood of confusion looms large"

Holding that litigation conduct can form the basis for an award of attorney's fees where such conduct is "fraudulent."

Holding that the "determinative question" in applying common law tort of unfair competition is "whether the tortfeasor's practices are likely to mislead customers into believing that the product emanates from or has been endorsed by the claimant"

Holding injunctive relief to be appropriate for use that mark-owner acquiesced to but not for infringement that took place after receipt of a cease and desist letter

Holding assessment of consumer confusion a result of consultation of factors, not result of mechanical formula

Holding that the same principles that govern trademark law should apply to trade dress litigation

Holding that there is a "likelihood of confusion" where "survey evidence as well as anecdotal evidence of actual confusion" exists

Affirming an injunction against defendant's use of a mark too similar to defendant's previously infringing mark

Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."