§

ZAO Gruppa Predpriyatij OST v. ZAO Odessky Konjatschnyi Zawod ZAO Odessky Konjatschnyi Zawod v. ZAO Gruppa Predpriyatij OST

No. 91161570 (T.T.A.B. Feb. 8, 2012)
ZAO Gruppa Predpriyatij OST v. ZAO Odessky Konjatschnyi Zawod ZAO Odessky Konjatschnyi Zawod v. ZAO Gruppa Predpriyatij OST

18 Cited authorities

  1. In re Bose Corp.

    580 F.3d 1240 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 172 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an applicant commits fraud when it knowingly makes false, material representations of fact with an intent to deceive the PTO

  2. 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"

  3. Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.

    222 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 73 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding similarity between LASER for golf clubs and golf balls and LASERSWING for golf practice devices, and noting that "the term ‘swing’ is both common and descriptive" and therefore "may be given little weight in reaching a conclusion on likelihood of confusion"

  4. Imperial Tobacco v. Philip Morris, Inc.

    899 F.2d 1575 (Fed. Cir. 1990)   Cited 86 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Finding that promotional use of a mark on “incidental products” like whiskey, pens, watches, sunglasses, and food did not constitute use of mark for cigarettes

  5. 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

  6. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc.

    281 F.3d 1261 (Fed. Cir. 2002)   Cited 33 times
    Holding that a registration for “electronic transmission of data and documents via computer terminals” is “closely related” to a registration “covering facsimile machines, computers, and computer software”

  7. Torres v. Cantine Torresella S.R.L

    808 F.2d 46 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 52 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Affirming TTAB's cancellation of trademark for fraudulently obtaining registration

  8. Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America

    970 F.2d 874 (Fed. Cir. 1992)   Cited 39 times
    Finding similarity between "CENTURY 21" and "CENTURY LIFE OF AMERICA" in part because "consumers must first notice th[e] identical lead word"

  9. In re Majestic Distilling Co., Inc.

    315 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 12 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that malt liquor and tequila sold under the same mark would cause a likelihood of confusion

  10. Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v. General Mills Fun Group, Inc.

    648 F.2d 1335 (C.C.P.A. 1981)   Cited 9 times
    Finding extensive licensing of mark MONOPOLY for real estate game relevant evidence of relatedness of goods

  11. Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 26   Cited 99,108 times   679 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

  12. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 93,811 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

  13. Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 33   Cited 11,210 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Rule 30(b)

  14. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,873 times   126 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,597 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"

  16. Section 1126 - International conventions

    15 U.S.C. § 1126   Cited 185 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Stating that an application under § 44 "must state the applicant's bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, but use in commerce shall not be required prior to registration"