§

Cenveo Corporation

No. 77289355 (T.T.A.B. Sep. 30, 2009)
Cenveo Corporation

10 Cited authorities

  1. In re Dial-A-Mattress Operating Corp.

    240 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 38 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that 1–888–M–A–T–T–R–E–S–S “immediately conveys the impressions that a service relating to mattresses is available by calling the telephone number”

  2. In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, Smith

    828 F.2d 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 57 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding applicant's incontestable registration of a service mark for "cash management account" did not automatically entitle applicant to registration of that mark for broader financial services

  3. H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. International Ass'n of Fire Chiefs, Inc.

    782 F.2d 987 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 45 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Reversing decision of TTAB that "Fire Chief," as applied to monthly magazine circulated to fire departments, was generic

  4. Magic Wand, Inc. v. RDB, Inc.

    940 F.2d 638 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 32 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that the Lanham Act is clear "that the relevant public for a genericness determination is the purchasing or consuming public"

  5. In re the American Fertility Society

    188 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 22 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an earlier precedential decision is binding precedent on later panels

  6. In re Gould Paper Corp.

    834 F.2d 1017 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 20 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the compound term "SCREEN-WIPE" is generic as applied to wipes for cleaning monitor screens

  7. University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co.

    703 F.2d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 1983)   Cited 19 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 703 F.2d 1372, 1376, 217 USPQ 505, 509 (Fed. Cir. 1983), the court added that section 2(a) embraces concepts of the right to privacy which may be violated even in the absence of likelihood of confusion.

  8. In re K-T Zoe Furniture, Inc.

    16 F.3d 390 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 4 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 92-1509. February 8, 1994. Jerome A. Gross, Jerome A. Gross Associates, of St. Louis, Missouri, argued for appellant. With him on the brief was Carol J. Hamilton. Nancy C. Slutter, Associate Solicitor, Office of the Solicitor, of Arlington, Virginia, argued for appellee. With her on the brief was Fred E. McKelvey, Solicitor. Of counsel were Richard E. Schafer, Lee E. Barrett and Albin F. Drost. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Before

  9. In re Precious Diamonds, Inc.

    635 F.2d 845 (C.C.P.A. 1980)   Cited 4 times

    Appeal No. 80-540. December 18, 1980. Andrew J. Cornelius, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant. Joseph F. Nakamura, Sol., Jeffrey H. Kaufman, Trademark Atty., Fred E. McKelvey, Associate Sol., Washington, D.C., for Patent and Trademark Office. Appeal from the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks. Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, MILLER and NIES, Judges. MILLER, Judge. This appeal pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1071(a) is from a decision of the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, acting through

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,599 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"