§

Bernatello's Pizza, Inc. v. Timothy Bammann

91251606 (T.T.A.B. Feb. 11, 2022)
Bernatello's Pizza, Inc. v. Timothy Bammann

33 Cited authorities

  1. Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc.

    505 U.S. 763 (1992)   Cited 1,999 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to establish a claim for trade dress infringement, secondary meaning, non-functionality and likelihood of confusion must all be shown

  2. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Brothers, Inc.

    529 U.S. 205 (2000)   Cited 793 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive

  3. Taylor v. United States

    136 S. Ct. 2074 (2016)   Cited 120 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding the meaning of “commerce” element in a different federal statute, the Hobbs Act, to be a question of law

  4. Wickard v. Filburn

    317 U.S. 111 (1942)   Cited 924 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"

  5. Coach Services, Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC

    668 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2012)   Cited 108 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it is the opposer's burden to prove fame of its mark

  6. 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"

  7. Palm Bay Imp. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin

    396 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 72 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"

  8. Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.

    222 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 74 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"

  9. Recot, Inc. v. Becton

    214 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2000)   Cited 57 times
    Holding that the Board legally erred in not according sufficient weight to evidence of a mark's fame in a likelihood of confusion analysis, vacating, and remanding for further consideration

  10. Juice Generation, Inc. v. GS Enterprises LLC

    794 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 28 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Determining that TTAB failed to adequately account for evidence of "a fair number of third-party uses" of similar marks by discounting the evidence for lack of "specifics regarding the extent of sales or promotional efforts surrounding the third-party marks"

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

    Fed. R. Evid. 801   Cited 19,581 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

  12. Section 1051 - Application for registration; verification

    15 U.S.C. § 1051   Cited 3,882 times   126 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a filing of a Statement of Use to register a mark

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 3,015 times   98 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

  14. Rule 613 - Witness's Prior Statement

    Fed. R. Evid. 613   Cited 814 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing the procedure for admitting extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement

  15. Rule 607 - Who May Impeach a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 607   Cited 548 times
    Rejecting the voucher rule